I also vote for reverting the Table API changes. On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 6:16 PM, Ufuk Celebi <u...@apache.org> wrote:
> > On 17 Jun 2015, at 18:05, Aljoscha Krettek <aljos...@apache.org> wrote: > > > -1 > > > > There is a bug in the newly introduced Null-Value support in > RowSerializer: > > The serializer was changed to write booleans that signify if a field is > > null. For comparison this still uses the TupleComparatorBase (via > > CaseClassComparator) which is not aware of these changes. > > > > The reason why no Unit-Test found this problem is that it only occurs if > > very long keys are used that exceed the normalised-key length. Only then > do > > we actually have to compare the binary data. > > > > I see three options: > > - Revert the relevant Table API changes > > - Create a new RowComparator that does not derive from > CaseClassComparator > > but basically copies almost all the code > > - Add support for null-values in Tuples and Case classes as well, thereby > > bringing all composite types in sync regarding null-values. > > I vote vor option 1 for now. >
