Skip to content

Comments

Docs: Add informational properties section for table comment#15367

Open
yguy-ryft wants to merge 2 commits intoapache:mainfrom
yguy-ryft:docs-informational-properties
Open

Docs: Add informational properties section for table comment#15367
yguy-ryft wants to merge 2 commits intoapache:mainfrom
yguy-ryft:docs-informational-properties

Conversation

@yguy-ryft
Copy link
Contributor

@yguy-ryft yguy-ryft commented Feb 19, 2026

  • Adds a new "Informational properties" section to the table properties documentation
  • Documents the comment property, which engines like Spark and Flink set via COMMENT in CREATE TABLE DDL
  • This follows a discussion on the dev mailing list about standardizing documentation for properties like comment that provide semantic context about a table - https://lists.apache.org/thread/5q92y3dlnc3mb5b2cj72hzs6xmy3xtfl
  • Ran locally and the section was rendered properly:
image

@github-actions github-actions bot added the docs label Feb 19, 2026

### Informational properties

Informational properties are not used by Iceberg operations, but can be set by engines to provide additional context about a table.
Copy link
Contributor

@stevenzwu stevenzwu Feb 19, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

nit: an alternative

Informational properties can be set to provide additional context about a table. They can be useful for documentation, discovery, and integration with external tools. They do not affect read/write behavior or query semantics.


| Property | Default | Description |
| -------- | ---------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| comment | (not set) | A human-readable description of the table. Engines like Spark and Flink set this via `COMMENT` in create table DDL. |
Copy link
Contributor

@stevenzwu stevenzwu Feb 19, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Engines like Spark and Flink set this via COMMENT in create table DDL.

I am not sure we need to call this out. I would be good to just remove it.

A human-readable description of the table.

The doc is not just for human to read. The semantic context for LLMs might be the imore mportant use case nowadays :)

A table-level description that documents the business meaning and usage context. 

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I am also debating if we need to add more details like these. I guess we probably should leave those details out.

It can cover information like business purpose, data source/pipeline, granularity, ownership, update frequency, SLA/freshness, common query patterns, relationships, disambiguation, domain-specific context, etc.

| -------------- | -------- |--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| format-version | 2 | Table's format version as defined in the [Spec](../../spec.md#format-versioning). Defaults to 2 since version 1.4.0. |

### Informational properties
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

nit: we might want to call out the side effect of storing information properties in the table metadata. One that im thinking of is that updating comments will create a new table version (new snapshot). This can lead to operational complexity since it follows the table commit path

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

there will be no new snapshot, but a new metadata.json file with a new commit

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@kevinjqliu this is true for all properties though, i'm not sure if we should call it out specifically here - WDYT?
Theoretically we can put this as a disclaimer for the entire page, but I would separate that to a different PR regardless.

Updated the description of informational properties and the comment property for clarity.
@yguy-ryft yguy-ryft requested a review from stevenzwu February 22, 2026 16:31
@yguy-ryft
Copy link
Contributor Author

@stevenzwu your suggestions were great, I replaced the texts with them - thanks!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants