Skip to content

Add delete file index to pyiceberg and support equality delete reads #2255

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

Open
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

geruh
Copy link
Contributor

@geruh geruh commented Jul 29, 2025

Closes #1210

Summary

This work was primarily done by @rutb327 while I provided guidance!

This PR adds equality delete read support to PyIceberg by implementing the delete file indexing system that matches delete files to data files, mimicking the behavior found in Iceberg Core. With this implementation we are able to index files and now read equality deletes during table scans.

Design details

Delete File Index

The new DeleteFileIndex class centralizes handling of all delete file types: positional deletes, equality deletes, and deletion vectors. It organizes deletes by type (equality vs. positional), partition (using PartitionMap for spec-aware grouping), and path (for path-specific positional deletes). This enables efficient lookup during table scans, reducing unnecessary delete file processing.

Equality Delete support

Equality delete files are loaded as PyArrow Tables with their respective equality ids for the schema and for each we are grouping tables with the same set equality id's to reduce anti join operations.

Testing

Added tests from the core iceberg DeleteFileIndex test suite and added some tests with dummy files. As well as some manual testing with a flink setup.

table_eq with only equality deletes on id=2, id=5
+---+-------+
| id|   data|
+---+-------+
|  1|  Alice|
|  3|Charlie|
|  4|  David|
|  6|  Frank|
+---+-------+

table_eq_pos with equality deletes and positional delete at position 3
+---+-----+
| id| data|
+---+-----+
|  1|Alice|
|  4|David|
|  6|Frank|
+---+-----+

Are there any user-facing changes?

Yes can read tables with equality deletes

@gabeiglio
Copy link
Contributor

I noticed that this PR addresses the same issue/feature as the one I was working on in here. However, your implementation is more complete (by supporting reading equality deletes and deletion vectors), so I think it makes sense to move forward with this one instead. (cc: @sungwy, since you reviewed my PR)

@kevinjqliu
Copy link
Contributor

kevinjqliu commented Jul 31, 2025

oops, sorry @gabeiglio, I was searching for positional deletes in github search and i didnt see that you were already working on it in that PR. Looks like there are some parts of the PR that is still super useful to get merged, like the validates.

@gabeiglio
Copy link
Contributor

Yea exactly, should have been more clear on my message, my implementation for DeleteFileIndex was a scope creep to achieve the validation. so now that PR can be only for the validation instead of partition maps, delete file index, etc. :) @kevinjqliu

@@ -978,18 +979,23 @@ def _get_file_format(file_format: FileFormat, **kwargs: Dict[str, Any]) -> ds.Fi
raise ValueError(f"Unsupported file format: {file_format}")


def _read_deletes(io: FileIO, data_file: DataFile) -> Dict[str, pa.ChunkedArray]:
def _read_deletes(io: FileIO, data_file: DataFile) -> Union[Dict[str, pa.ChunkedArray], pa.Table]:
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think the output signature and the role of this function is convoluted.

Would it make sense to have two separate functions instead?

Comment on lines 1597 to 1611
equality_delete_tasks = []
for task in tasks:
equality_deletes = [df for df in task.delete_files if df.content == DataFileContent.EQUALITY_DELETES]
if equality_deletes:
for delete_file in equality_deletes:
# create a group of datafile to associated equality delete
equality_delete_tasks.append((task.file.file_path, delete_file))

if equality_delete_tasks:
executor = ExecutorFactory.get_or_create()
# Processing equality delete tasks in parallel like position deletes
equality_delete_results = executor.map(
lambda args: (args[0], _read_deletes(io, args[1])),
equality_delete_tasks,
)
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We are already getting a subset of the files that have equality deletes, so it would make sense to use a different function to read the deletes, than using the convoluted function _read_deletes

deletes_per_file: Dict[str, List[ChunkedArray]] = {}
unique_deletes = set(itertools.chain.from_iterable([task.delete_files for task in tasks]))
if len(unique_deletes) > 0:
def _read_all_delete_files(io: FileIO, tasks: Iterable[FileScanTask]) -> Union[Dict[str, pa.ChunkedArray], pa.Table]:
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Should this be:

Suggested change
def _read_all_delete_files(io: FileIO, tasks: Iterable[FileScanTask]) -> Union[Dict[str, pa.ChunkedArray], pa.Table]:
def _read_all_delete_files(io: FileIO, tasks: Iterable[FileScanTask]) -> Dict[str, List[Union[pa.ChunkedArray, pa.Table]]]:

@@ -1679,7 +1749,7 @@ def batches_for_task(task: FileScanTask) -> List[pa.RecordBatch]:
break

def _record_batches_from_scan_tasks_and_deletes(
self, tasks: Iterable[FileScanTask], deletes_per_file: Dict[str, List[ChunkedArray]]
self, tasks: Iterable[FileScanTask], deletes_per_file: Union[Dict[str, pa.ChunkedArray], pa.Table]
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
self, tasks: Iterable[FileScanTask], deletes_per_file: Union[Dict[str, pa.ChunkedArray], pa.Table]
self, tasks: Iterable[FileScanTask], deletes_per_file: Dict[str, List[Union[pa.ChunkedArray, pa.Table]]]

Copy link
Collaborator

@sungwy sungwy left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Hi @geruh - thanks for working on this PR, and sorry for the delayed review.

I've added some review feedback. Let me know your thoughts!

@rutb327
Copy link

rutb327 commented Aug 14, 2025

@sungwy Thanks a lot! I have done the suggested changes, could you take another look at it?

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.

[feature request] Support reading equality delete files
5 participants