[#5370] feat(iceberg): make IcebergTableOperationDispatcher interface more extendible #5369
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
FANNG1
changed the title
|
Do we plan to make similar changes to |
puchengy
reviewed
Oct 30, 2024
Comment on lines
84
to
85
| new IcebergCreateTablePreEvent( | ||
| PrincipalUtils.getCurrentUserName(), nameIdentifier, createTableRequest)); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Would it be possible to pass the whole context object inside pre-listener and post listener?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Could you describe the scenarios?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, the use case is logging request headers within the event listener.
yes, will do |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What changes were proposed in this pull request?
add
IcebergRequestContextinIcebergTableOperationDispatcherWhy are the changes needed?
Fix: #5370
Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?
No
How was this patch tested?
existing tests