Hi Jark, Jingsong, Timo:
I read the FLINK-12848, the root cause of this issue should be 'cache the
RowTypeInfo in seenTypes'. In my opinion, RowType should be compared with
type. BTW, I don't understand why it need cache the composite type. Could
you please explain the following comments, thanks.
Hi caizhi and kaka and jark:
I think we should keep current equals in RowType and StructuredType.
@Timo WaltherWhat do you think? Do you think we can use asSerializableString?
Best, JingsongLee
--
From:kaka chen
Send Time:2019年7月16
Hi Caizhi and Kaka,
Actually, equals-with-field-names and equals-without-field-names are both
needed in Flink SQL.
It's not correct to ignore field names comparison simply in RowType#equals.
We have encountered this problems before because RowTypeInfo doesn't
compare field names (see FLINK-12848).
Hi Caizhi and Jark,
I think you are correct, from the quick view for source code, it should
only compares field types in the equals method.
Currently some composite logical row type has compared name and
description, such as RowType and StructuredType.
Thanks,
Kaka Chen
Caizhi Weng 于2019年7月16日周
Hi Caizhi and Mark,
I think you are correct, from the quick view for source code, it should
only compares field types in the equals method.
Currently some composite logical row type has compared name and
description, such as RowType and StructuredType.
Thanks,
Kaka Chen
Caizhi Weng 于2019年7月16日周
Hi Kaka and Jark,
On a side note, `RowTypeInfo` only compares field types in its `equals`
method. I think our new logical row type shouldn't break this behavior.
kaka chen 于2019年7月16日周二 下午10:53写道：
> Hi Jark,
>
> Thanks!
>
> Thanks,
> Kaka Chen
>
> Jark Wu 于2019年7月16日周二 下午10:30写道：
>
> > Hi Kaka
Hi Jark,
Thanks!
Thanks,
Kaka Chen
Jark Wu 于2019年7月16日周二 下午10:30写道：
> Hi Kaka,
>
> Thanks for reporting this. We didn't cover integrate tests for connectors
> yet because of FLINK-13276. We will cover that after FLINK-13276 is fixed.
>
> The problem you raised might because we misused `Logical
Hi Kaka,
Thanks for reporting this. We didn't cover integrate tests for connectors
yet because of FLINK-13276. We will cover that after FLINK-13276 is fixed.
The problem you raised might because we misused `LogicalType.equals` which
will checks field names as well.
I have created an issue (FLINK-
I am looking this issue, the related codes which throw errors are:
SinkCodeGenerator:: validateFieldType()
...
// Tuple/Case class/Row type requested
case tt: TupleTypeInfoBase[_] =>
fieldTypes.zipWithIndex foreach {
case (fieldTypeInfo: GenericTypeInfo[_
