Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[SNOW-1711460] Upgrade to latest iceberg version #863

Closed
wants to merge 8 commits into from

Conversation

sfc-gh-xhuang
Copy link
Contributor

@sfc-gh-xhuang sfc-gh-xhuang commented Oct 15, 2024

Upgrading to latest version to ensure tests and releases are using a more recent version to ensure the next upgrade to 1.6.2 has minimal changes.

This still does not fix the synk issue until 1.6.2 is released

Copy link
Contributor

@sfc-gh-alhuang sfc-gh-alhuang left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Verified that the Iceberg ITs can run with Iceberg 1.6.1, thanks!

@sfc-gh-xhuang
Copy link
Contributor Author

We'll wait for 1.7.0 release at end of month and see

@sfc-gh-xhuang
Copy link
Contributor Author

1.7.0 should be released by Oct 31: https://lists.apache.org/thread/x58g33dqbvxcpdhw9h5o0ns15vzdvszs

@sfc-gh-xhuang
Copy link
Contributor Author

1.7.0 release should be out this week after a last minute fix:
https://lists.apache.org/thread/7f940dc8vnct0xxyh2lvo4x082zlf3c1

@sfc-gh-xhuang
Copy link
Contributor Author

@sfc-gh-hmadan @sfc-gh-alhuang can you please run your iceberg tests with this latest version?

@sfc-gh-xhuang
Copy link
Contributor Author

I think we can't upgrade to 1.7.0 as they dropped java 8 support https://lists.apache.org/thread/xd4sjd0cx010qcv9qmlt89zdx4s1cyp4

@sfc-gh-xhuang
Copy link
Contributor Author

sfc-gh-xhuang commented Nov 8, 2024

Looks like our options for release are:

  1. fork 1.6.1 and upgrade avro version
  2. use 1.6.1 and indicate that the CVE is a false alarm / not exploitable as confirmed by iceberg team

@sfc-gh-xhuang
Copy link
Contributor Author

We will go with option 2 for the time being as indicated in #894

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants