You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@iceberg.apache.org by Ian Streeter <ia...@snowplow.io.INVALID> on 2025/02/17 15:48:16 UTC
[Discuss] Print un-pretty metadata JSON files without whitespace
Currently, metadata files are pretty-printed, with lots of new-lines and
whitespace indentations. This is the relevant line of code, which uses
the Jackson default pretty printer:
https://github.com/apache/iceberg/blob/abb47830e7df7dc2ae93c74b0ad97f06cdd37aad/core/src/main/java/org/apache/iceberg/TableMetadataParser.java#L131
If we could write metadata files without redundant whitespace, then it
would save some storage space, and network overhead.
This will have have most impact for tables with large metadata files. For
example, I have seen a metadata files which was 53.6MB. After removing
whitespace, this was reduced to 41.4MB. I have read other issues in github
which mention gigabyte-scale metadata files.
I cannot think of any downside of this suggested change. Metadata files are
mainly read by machines not humans. And if a human does want to inspect a
metadata file, then it is fairly easy to prettify a JSON file when needed.
I opened this as an issue in github, and then took advice to move the
discussion to this dev list. See
https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12281
I would appreciate hearing your thoughts.
Thanks,
Ian
Re: [Discuss] Print un-pretty metadata JSON files without whitespace
Posted by Marc Cenac <ma...@datadoghq.com.INVALID>.
> Perhaps this is a good default on the catalog side when creating new
metadata json.
+1 for this b/c I think it's an easy performance win for tables with large
metadata. Is there any reason not to have write.metadata.compression-codec
default to gzip? I'm curious if there was a reason it's currently set to
none
On Fri, Mar 21, 2025 at 1:43 AM Micah Kornfield <em...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> This reminds me that GZipped metadata files are not covered in the spec.
> I opened https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/12598 to try to document
> them (feedback welcome).
>
> On Mon, Feb 17, 2025 at 2:35 PM Kevin Liu <ke...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> +1, json with no whitespace sounds like a reasonable default. But if
>> saving storage space and network is the main goal, then setting
>> `write.metadata.compression-codec` to `gzip` is way more impactful. Perhaps
>> this is a good default on the catalog side when creating new metadata json.
>>
>> Best,
>> Kevin Liu
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 17, 2025 at 12:19 PM Ian Streeter <ia...@snowplow.io.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> The numbers I shared were for uncompressed files.
>>>
>>> I am embarrassed to say I had not noticed there is an option
>>> `write.metadata.compression-codec`. I had it set to the default `none`,
>>> and I reckon many other Iceberg users will too.
>>>
>>> Here are some updated numbers for my example metadata file:
>>>
>>> - Uncompressed with whitespace: 53.6 MB
>>> - Uncompressed, no whitespace: 41.4 MB
>>> - Gzipped, with whitespace: 5.36 MB
>>> - Gzipped, no whitespace: 5.13 MB
>>>
>>> So there is a 4.3% improvement in dropping whitespace for a gzipped
>>> file. I admit this is less improvement that I originally thought.
>>>
>>> But even so... I still think this sounds like an easy win, especially if
>>> many users (like myself) didn't know to enable compression.
>>>
>>> On Mon, 17 Feb 2025 at 19:51, Steve Zhang
>>> <ho...@apple.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> +1. Configure table property `write.metadata.compression-codec` to gzip
>>>> is usually suggested to reduce metadata size but drop whitespace can still
>>>> help here.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Steve Zhang
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Feb 17, 2025, at 8:32 AM, Fokko Driesprong <fo...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hey Ian,
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for raising this. The numbers you mention, do you know if this
>>>> was compressed or uncompressed?
>>>>
>>>> I have read other issues in github which mention gigabyte-scale
>>>>> metadata files.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This sounds like a bad practice, and that table probably needs some
>>>> maintenance.
>>>>
>>>> I don't have the historical context of why we produce pretty JSON. I
>>>> think this would be an easy optimization, and I agree that making them
>>>> easily consumable by humans afterward is trivial. FWIW, PyIceberg also
>>>> produces unpretty JSON.
>>>>
>>>> Kind regards,
>>>> Fokko
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Op ma 17 feb 2025 om 16:48 schreef Ian Streeter <ian@snowplow.io.invalid
>>>> >:
>>>>
>>>>> Currently, metadata files are pretty-printed, with lots of new-lines
>>>>> and whitespace indentations. This is the relevant line of code, which
>>>>> uses the Jackson default pretty printer:
>>>>> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/blob/abb47830e7df7dc2ae93c74b0ad97f06cdd37aad/core/src/main/java/org/apache/iceberg/TableMetadataParser.java#L131
>>>>>
>>>>> If we could write metadata files without redundant whitespace, then it
>>>>> would save some storage space, and network overhead.
>>>>>
>>>>> This will have have most impact for tables with large metadata files.
>>>>> For example, I have seen a metadata files which was 53.6MB. After removing
>>>>> whitespace, this was reduced to 41.4MB. I have read other issues in github
>>>>> which mention gigabyte-scale metadata files.
>>>>>
>>>>> I cannot think of any downside of this suggested change. Metadata
>>>>> files are mainly read by machines not humans. And if a human does want to
>>>>> inspect a metadata file, then it is fairly easy to prettify a JSON file
>>>>> when needed.
>>>>>
>>>>> I opened this as an issue in github, and then took advice to move the
>>>>> discussion to this dev list. See
>>>>> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12281
>>>>>
>>>>> I would appreciate hearing your thoughts.
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Ian
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
Re: [Discuss] Print un-pretty metadata JSON files without whitespace
Posted by Micah Kornfield <em...@gmail.com>.
This reminds me that GZipped metadata files are not covered in the spec. I
opened https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/12598 to try to document them
(feedback welcome).
On Mon, Feb 17, 2025 at 2:35 PM Kevin Liu <ke...@apache.org> wrote:
> +1, json with no whitespace sounds like a reasonable default. But if
> saving storage space and network is the main goal, then setting
> `write.metadata.compression-codec` to `gzip` is way more impactful. Perhaps
> this is a good default on the catalog side when creating new metadata json.
>
> Best,
> Kevin Liu
>
> On Mon, Feb 17, 2025 at 12:19 PM Ian Streeter <ia...@snowplow.io.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>> The numbers I shared were for uncompressed files.
>>
>> I am embarrassed to say I had not noticed there is an option
>> `write.metadata.compression-codec`. I had it set to the default `none`,
>> and I reckon many other Iceberg users will too.
>>
>> Here are some updated numbers for my example metadata file:
>>
>> - Uncompressed with whitespace: 53.6 MB
>> - Uncompressed, no whitespace: 41.4 MB
>> - Gzipped, with whitespace: 5.36 MB
>> - Gzipped, no whitespace: 5.13 MB
>>
>> So there is a 4.3% improvement in dropping whitespace for a gzipped
>> file. I admit this is less improvement that I originally thought.
>>
>> But even so... I still think this sounds like an easy win, especially if
>> many users (like myself) didn't know to enable compression.
>>
>> On Mon, 17 Feb 2025 at 19:51, Steve Zhang <ho...@apple.com.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> +1. Configure table property `write.metadata.compression-codec` to gzip
>>> is usually suggested to reduce metadata size but drop whitespace can still
>>> help here.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Steve Zhang
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Feb 17, 2025, at 8:32 AM, Fokko Driesprong <fo...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hey Ian,
>>>
>>> Thanks for raising this. The numbers you mention, do you know if this
>>> was compressed or uncompressed?
>>>
>>> I have read other issues in github which mention gigabyte-scale metadata
>>>> files.
>>>
>>>
>>> This sounds like a bad practice, and that table probably needs some
>>> maintenance.
>>>
>>> I don't have the historical context of why we produce pretty JSON. I
>>> think this would be an easy optimization, and I agree that making them
>>> easily consumable by humans afterward is trivial. FWIW, PyIceberg also
>>> produces unpretty JSON.
>>>
>>> Kind regards,
>>> Fokko
>>>
>>>
>>> Op ma 17 feb 2025 om 16:48 schreef Ian Streeter <ian@snowplow.io.invalid
>>> >:
>>>
>>>> Currently, metadata files are pretty-printed, with lots of new-lines
>>>> and whitespace indentations. This is the relevant line of code, which
>>>> uses the Jackson default pretty printer:
>>>> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/blob/abb47830e7df7dc2ae93c74b0ad97f06cdd37aad/core/src/main/java/org/apache/iceberg/TableMetadataParser.java#L131
>>>>
>>>> If we could write metadata files without redundant whitespace, then it
>>>> would save some storage space, and network overhead.
>>>>
>>>> This will have have most impact for tables with large metadata files.
>>>> For example, I have seen a metadata files which was 53.6MB. After removing
>>>> whitespace, this was reduced to 41.4MB. I have read other issues in github
>>>> which mention gigabyte-scale metadata files.
>>>>
>>>> I cannot think of any downside of this suggested change. Metadata files
>>>> are mainly read by machines not humans. And if a human does want to inspect
>>>> a metadata file, then it is fairly easy to prettify a JSON file when needed.
>>>>
>>>> I opened this as an issue in github, and then took advice to move the
>>>> discussion to this dev list. See
>>>> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12281
>>>>
>>>> I would appreciate hearing your thoughts.
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Ian
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
Re: [Discuss] Print un-pretty metadata JSON files without whitespace
Posted by Kevin Liu <ke...@apache.org>.
+1, json with no whitespace sounds like a reasonable default. But if saving
storage space and network is the main goal, then setting
`write.metadata.compression-codec` to `gzip` is way more impactful. Perhaps
this is a good default on the catalog side when creating new metadata json.
Best,
Kevin Liu
On Mon, Feb 17, 2025 at 12:19 PM Ian Streeter <ia...@snowplow.io.invalid>
wrote:
> The numbers I shared were for uncompressed files.
>
> I am embarrassed to say I had not noticed there is an option
> `write.metadata.compression-codec`. I had it set to the default `none`,
> and I reckon many other Iceberg users will too.
>
> Here are some updated numbers for my example metadata file:
>
> - Uncompressed with whitespace: 53.6 MB
> - Uncompressed, no whitespace: 41.4 MB
> - Gzipped, with whitespace: 5.36 MB
> - Gzipped, no whitespace: 5.13 MB
>
> So there is a 4.3% improvement in dropping whitespace for a gzipped file.
> I admit this is less improvement that I originally thought.
>
> But even so... I still think this sounds like an easy win, especially if
> many users (like myself) didn't know to enable compression.
>
> On Mon, 17 Feb 2025 at 19:51, Steve Zhang <ho...@apple.com.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>> +1. Configure table property `write.metadata.compression-codec` to gzip
>> is usually suggested to reduce metadata size but drop whitespace can still
>> help here.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Steve Zhang
>>
>>
>>
>> On Feb 17, 2025, at 8:32 AM, Fokko Driesprong <fo...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> Hey Ian,
>>
>> Thanks for raising this. The numbers you mention, do you know if this was
>> compressed or uncompressed?
>>
>> I have read other issues in github which mention gigabyte-scale metadata
>>> files.
>>
>>
>> This sounds like a bad practice, and that table probably needs some
>> maintenance.
>>
>> I don't have the historical context of why we produce pretty JSON. I
>> think this would be an easy optimization, and I agree that making them
>> easily consumable by humans afterward is trivial. FWIW, PyIceberg also
>> produces unpretty JSON.
>>
>> Kind regards,
>> Fokko
>>
>>
>> Op ma 17 feb 2025 om 16:48 schreef Ian Streeter <ian@snowplow.io.invalid
>> >:
>>
>>> Currently, metadata files are pretty-printed, with lots of new-lines and
>>> whitespace indentations. This is the relevant line of code, which uses
>>> the Jackson default pretty printer:
>>> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/blob/abb47830e7df7dc2ae93c74b0ad97f06cdd37aad/core/src/main/java/org/apache/iceberg/TableMetadataParser.java#L131
>>>
>>> If we could write metadata files without redundant whitespace, then it
>>> would save some storage space, and network overhead.
>>>
>>> This will have have most impact for tables with large metadata files.
>>> For example, I have seen a metadata files which was 53.6MB. After removing
>>> whitespace, this was reduced to 41.4MB. I have read other issues in github
>>> which mention gigabyte-scale metadata files.
>>>
>>> I cannot think of any downside of this suggested change. Metadata files
>>> are mainly read by machines not humans. And if a human does want to inspect
>>> a metadata file, then it is fairly easy to prettify a JSON file when needed.
>>>
>>> I opened this as an issue in github, and then took advice to move the
>>> discussion to this dev list. See
>>> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12281
>>>
>>> I would appreciate hearing your thoughts.
>>> Thanks,
>>> Ian
>>>
>>>
>>
Re: [Discuss] Print un-pretty metadata JSON files without whitespace
Posted by Ian Streeter <ia...@snowplow.io.INVALID>.
The numbers I shared were for uncompressed files.
I am embarrassed to say I had not noticed there is an option
`write.metadata.compression-codec`. I had it set to the default `none`,
and I reckon many other Iceberg users will too.
Here are some updated numbers for my example metadata file:
- Uncompressed with whitespace: 53.6 MB
- Uncompressed, no whitespace: 41.4 MB
- Gzipped, with whitespace: 5.36 MB
- Gzipped, no whitespace: 5.13 MB
So there is a 4.3% improvement in dropping whitespace for a gzipped file.
I admit this is less improvement that I originally thought.
But even so... I still think this sounds like an easy win, especially if
many users (like myself) didn't know to enable compression.
On Mon, 17 Feb 2025 at 19:51, Steve Zhang <ho...@apple.com.invalid>
wrote:
> +1. Configure table property `write.metadata.compression-codec` to gzip is
> usually suggested to reduce metadata size but drop whitespace can still
> help here.
>
> Thanks,
> Steve Zhang
>
>
>
> On Feb 17, 2025, at 8:32 AM, Fokko Driesprong <fo...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Hey Ian,
>
> Thanks for raising this. The numbers you mention, do you know if this was
> compressed or uncompressed?
>
> I have read other issues in github which mention gigabyte-scale metadata
>> files.
>
>
> This sounds like a bad practice, and that table probably needs some
> maintenance.
>
> I don't have the historical context of why we produce pretty JSON. I think
> this would be an easy optimization, and I agree that making them easily
> consumable by humans afterward is trivial. FWIW, PyIceberg also produces
> unpretty JSON.
>
> Kind regards,
> Fokko
>
>
> Op ma 17 feb 2025 om 16:48 schreef Ian Streeter <ia...@snowplow.io.invalid>:
>
>> Currently, metadata files are pretty-printed, with lots of new-lines and
>> whitespace indentations. This is the relevant line of code, which uses
>> the Jackson default pretty printer:
>> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/blob/abb47830e7df7dc2ae93c74b0ad97f06cdd37aad/core/src/main/java/org/apache/iceberg/TableMetadataParser.java#L131
>>
>> If we could write metadata files without redundant whitespace, then it
>> would save some storage space, and network overhead.
>>
>> This will have have most impact for tables with large metadata files. For
>> example, I have seen a metadata files which was 53.6MB. After removing
>> whitespace, this was reduced to 41.4MB. I have read other issues in github
>> which mention gigabyte-scale metadata files.
>>
>> I cannot think of any downside of this suggested change. Metadata files
>> are mainly read by machines not humans. And if a human does want to inspect
>> a metadata file, then it is fairly easy to prettify a JSON file when needed.
>>
>> I opened this as an issue in github, and then took advice to move the
>> discussion to this dev list. See
>> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12281
>>
>> I would appreciate hearing your thoughts.
>> Thanks,
>> Ian
>>
>>
>
Re: [Discuss] Print un-pretty metadata JSON files without whitespace
Posted by Russell Spitzer <ru...@gmail.com>.
+0 - I would be surprised if post compression sizes were that different but
minifying json is a pretty standard practice for over the wire transfers
On Mon, Feb 17, 2025 at 1:51 PM Steve Zhang <ho...@apple.com.invalid>
wrote:
> +1. Configure table property `write.metadata.compression-codec` to gzip is
> usually suggested to reduce metadata size but drop whitespace can still
> help here.
>
> Thanks,
> Steve Zhang
>
>
>
> On Feb 17, 2025, at 8:32 AM, Fokko Driesprong <fo...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Hey Ian,
>
> Thanks for raising this. The numbers you mention, do you know if this was
> compressed or uncompressed?
>
> I have read other issues in github which mention gigabyte-scale metadata
>> files.
>
>
> This sounds like a bad practice, and that table probably needs some
> maintenance.
>
> I don't have the historical context of why we produce pretty JSON. I think
> this would be an easy optimization, and I agree that making them easily
> consumable by humans afterward is trivial. FWIW, PyIceberg also produces
> unpretty JSON.
>
> Kind regards,
> Fokko
>
>
> Op ma 17 feb 2025 om 16:48 schreef Ian Streeter <ia...@snowplow.io.invalid>:
>
>> Currently, metadata files are pretty-printed, with lots of new-lines and
>> whitespace indentations. This is the relevant line of code, which uses
>> the Jackson default pretty printer:
>> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/blob/abb47830e7df7dc2ae93c74b0ad97f06cdd37aad/core/src/main/java/org/apache/iceberg/TableMetadataParser.java#L131
>>
>> If we could write metadata files without redundant whitespace, then it
>> would save some storage space, and network overhead.
>>
>> This will have have most impact for tables with large metadata files. For
>> example, I have seen a metadata files which was 53.6MB. After removing
>> whitespace, this was reduced to 41.4MB. I have read other issues in github
>> which mention gigabyte-scale metadata files.
>>
>> I cannot think of any downside of this suggested change. Metadata files
>> are mainly read by machines not humans. And if a human does want to inspect
>> a metadata file, then it is fairly easy to prettify a JSON file when needed.
>>
>> I opened this as an issue in github, and then took advice to move the
>> discussion to this dev list. See
>> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12281
>>
>> I would appreciate hearing your thoughts.
>> Thanks,
>> Ian
>>
>>
>
Re: [Discuss] Print un-pretty metadata JSON files without whitespace
Posted by Steve Zhang <ho...@apple.com.INVALID>.
+1. Configure table property `write.metadata.compression-codec` to gzip is usually suggested to reduce metadata size but drop whitespace can still help here.
Thanks,
Steve Zhang
> On Feb 17, 2025, at 8:32 AM, Fokko Driesprong <fo...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Hey Ian,
>
> Thanks for raising this. The numbers you mention, do you know if this was compressed or uncompressed?
>
>> I have read other issues in github which mention gigabyte-scale metadata files.
>
> This sounds like a bad practice, and that table probably needs some maintenance.
>
> I don't have the historical context of why we produce pretty JSON. I think this would be an easy optimization, and I agree that making them easily consumable by humans afterward is trivial. FWIW, PyIceberg also produces unpretty JSON.
>
> Kind regards,
> Fokko
>
>
> Op ma 17 feb 2025 om 16:48 schreef Ian Streeter <ia...@snowplow.io.invalid>:
>> Currently, metadata files are pretty-printed, with lots of new-lines and whitespace indentations. This is the relevant line of code, which uses the Jackson default pretty printer: https://github.com/apache/iceberg/blob/abb47830e7df7dc2ae93c74b0ad97f06cdd37aad/core/src/main/java/org/apache/iceberg/TableMetadataParser.java#L131
>>
>> If we could write metadata files without redundant whitespace, then it would save some storage space, and network overhead.
>>
>> This will have have most impact for tables with large metadata files. For example, I have seen a metadata files which was 53.6MB. After removing whitespace, this was reduced to 41.4MB. I have read other issues in github which mention gigabyte-scale metadata files.
>>
>> I cannot think of any downside of this suggested change. Metadata files are mainly read by machines not humans. And if a human does want to inspect a metadata file, then it is fairly easy to prettify a JSON file when needed.
>>
>> I opened this as an issue in github, and then took advice to move the discussion to this dev list. See https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12281
>>
>> I would appreciate hearing your thoughts.
>> Thanks,
>> Ian
>>
Re: [Discuss] Print un-pretty metadata JSON files without whitespace
Posted by Steven Wu <st...@gmail.com>.
+1. it seems reasonable to produce unpretty json by default.
On Mon, Feb 17, 2025 at 8:35 AM Fokko Driesprong <fo...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hey Ian,
>
> Thanks for raising this. The numbers you mention, do you know if this was
> compressed or uncompressed?
>
> I have read other issues in github which mention gigabyte-scale metadata
>> files.
>
>
> This sounds like a bad practice, and that table probably needs some
> maintenance.
>
> I don't have the historical context of why we produce pretty JSON. I think
> this would be an easy optimization, and I agree that making them easily
> consumable by humans afterward is trivial. FWIW, PyIceberg also produces
> unpretty JSON.
>
> Kind regards,
> Fokko
>
>
> Op ma 17 feb 2025 om 16:48 schreef Ian Streeter <ia...@snowplow.io.invalid>:
>
>> Currently, metadata files are pretty-printed, with lots of new-lines and
>> whitespace indentations. This is the relevant line of code, which uses
>> the Jackson default pretty printer:
>> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/blob/abb47830e7df7dc2ae93c74b0ad97f06cdd37aad/core/src/main/java/org/apache/iceberg/TableMetadataParser.java#L131
>>
>> If we could write metadata files without redundant whitespace, then it
>> would save some storage space, and network overhead.
>>
>> This will have have most impact for tables with large metadata files. For
>> example, I have seen a metadata files which was 53.6MB. After removing
>> whitespace, this was reduced to 41.4MB. I have read other issues in github
>> which mention gigabyte-scale metadata files.
>>
>> I cannot think of any downside of this suggested change. Metadata files
>> are mainly read by machines not humans. And if a human does want to inspect
>> a metadata file, then it is fairly easy to prettify a JSON file when needed.
>>
>> I opened this as an issue in github, and then took advice to move the
>> discussion to this dev list. See
>> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12281
>>
>> I would appreciate hearing your thoughts.
>> Thanks,
>> Ian
>>
>>
Re: [Discuss] Print un-pretty metadata JSON files without whitespace
Posted by Fokko Driesprong <fo...@apache.org>.
Hey Ian,
Thanks for raising this. The numbers you mention, do you know if this was
compressed or uncompressed?
I have read other issues in github which mention gigabyte-scale metadata
> files.
This sounds like a bad practice, and that table probably needs some
maintenance.
I don't have the historical context of why we produce pretty JSON. I think
this would be an easy optimization, and I agree that making them easily
consumable by humans afterward is trivial. FWIW, PyIceberg also produces
unpretty JSON.
Kind regards,
Fokko
Op ma 17 feb 2025 om 16:48 schreef Ian Streeter <ia...@snowplow.io.invalid>:
> Currently, metadata files are pretty-printed, with lots of new-lines and
> whitespace indentations. This is the relevant line of code, which uses
> the Jackson default pretty printer:
> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/blob/abb47830e7df7dc2ae93c74b0ad97f06cdd37aad/core/src/main/java/org/apache/iceberg/TableMetadataParser.java#L131
>
> If we could write metadata files without redundant whitespace, then it
> would save some storage space, and network overhead.
>
> This will have have most impact for tables with large metadata files. For
> example, I have seen a metadata files which was 53.6MB. After removing
> whitespace, this was reduced to 41.4MB. I have read other issues in github
> which mention gigabyte-scale metadata files.
>
> I cannot think of any downside of this suggested change. Metadata files
> are mainly read by machines not humans. And if a human does want to inspect
> a metadata file, then it is fairly easy to prettify a JSON file when needed.
>
> I opened this as an issue in github, and then took advice to move the
> discussion to this dev list. See
> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12281
>
> I would appreciate hearing your thoughts.
> Thanks,
> Ian
>
>