If you want content suggestions, a list of things/tools/links that
ingest Avro (python, map reduce, drill, Azure data factory,
Aws Athenea/Redshift/Glue, Spark, Google Cloud/BigQuery,
Hadoop, Kafka etc.) helps make the case that your avro producing
whatever will have wide support.
On Fri, Oct 29,
Generally the "I'm going to lump all my complaints into
one big bug" is a good way to get them ignored.
I'll skip "the design is wrong and it should change because
I don't like it" and cite "it's used everywhere with lots of
implementations so you can't change it in an incompatible way".
I'll ski
owing it's a real issue.
On Sat, Feb 12, 2022 at 6:55 PM Dan Schmitt wrote:
>
> Generally the "I'm going to lump all my complaints into
> one big bug" is a good way to get them ignored.
>
> I'll skip "the design is wrong and it should change because
I was hoping I wasn't doing something complex, but I may be wrong.
My goal state is to allow callers to send arbitrary avro buffers to
me, and then merge them into a schema.
I seem to be stuck in that the exposed methods to extract the schema
from the buffer/stream etc result in a ValidSchema, wh
Try the protocol/idl stuff; docs are at:
https://avro.apache.org/docs/1.8.2/idl.html
The idl stuff is much nicer about syntax, does the merging (only
declares the enums where they are used, doesn't drop them in a global)
and will create schemas for each compound avro type.
Sam's suggestion works
Sounds like a job for a Union for payload.
And if the polymorphic payload is avro serialized you don't
have to know the schema ahead of time, you just need a
way to merge the new payload schema into the union as
you get it (so you can push the schema responsibility to
the client code giving you th
you could flatten things to just Message[Alarm], but
> this weakens the domain model.
>
> Can you think of a way to use Union types to represent marker traits? My
> understanding is Unions can't immediately contain other Unions (i.e. like
> Event -> PayloadKind).
>
> Greg
>
"name": "B",
"type": ["null", {
The [] union lets you do null or a BRecord, your JSON does null.
Pull the null from the union and it will require the C.
On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 9:00 AM, Martin Mucha wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have this avro schema:
>
> {
> "name" : "ARecord",
> "type" :
type" : "record",
> "namespace" : "A",
> "fields" : [
> {"name": "id", "type": "string" },
> {
> "name": "B",
> "type": {
> "type": "record
The top level object in all the examples is a record (of which you can
have 0 or more.)
So, right now, even the top level is failing the spec:
IV) valid (0 ARecords):
{ }
V) valid (2 ARecords):
{
"id": "...",
"B": {
"C": "..."
}
} ,
"id": "...",
"B": {
"C": "..."
}
}
On Mon, N
ct?
>
>
> Btw. what do you use to validate JSON using avro? I used avro-utils.jar
> executed from command line, which proved as incapable of deserializing &
> validating optional fields if they are set (if optional field is set, I have
> to pass value in json like: {"string
On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 9:09 PM, kant kodali wrote:
> // Since these types are not quoted and produce a malformed
> JSON string, quote it here.
> if (datum instanceof java.sql.Timestamp || datum instanceof
> java.sql.Time || datum instanceof java.sql.Date) {
>
I would check that the link line that CMake is generating has what you
expect (-l and
-L) and that the parameters to your boost build included the
iostreams/zlib options.
(If I were remotely debugging, command line for bjam, and verbose cmake out.)
On Wed, Apr 3, 2019 at 1:27 PM R S wrote:
>
> I
It can't tell from your use what type to return/cast the value to so
its failing.
default_value.value();
will try to do it as an int64_t to match the long. Alternatively you
should be able to do
int64_t value = default_value.value();
and it can guess the type there.
I suspect your pro
Background:
I have devices generating avro files and throwing them at S3.
The S3 consumers want to push some more data into them so they have
a lambda that does a copy/transform to push the data in.
For some reason they wrote their initial code with the 1.0 release of Avro,
and added fields to the
Only difference I can see is the null default/union possibly not being
handled well by avro_record_set
or avro_record(schema)
Without reading the source I'd expect avro_record(schema) to default
the default union values to null
leading to some sort of let's keep reading this memory issue because
w
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aq_1l316ow8
https://avro.apache.org/mailing_lists.html
On Tue, Oct 13, 2020 at 7:19 AM Anubhav Siddharth wrote:
>
> Unsubscribe
17 matches
Mail list logo
