f may be convenient in
> some use cases if we can just keep the order (roughly) consistent with the
> order of the parent fields from the original schema.
>
>
>
> *From: *Brian Hulette
> *Reply-To: *"user@beam.apache.org"
> *Date: *Wednesday, January 20, 2021 at
convenient in some use cases if we
can just keep the order (roughly) consistent with the order of the parent
fields from the original schema.
From: Brian Hulette
Reply-To: "user@beam.apache.org"
Date: Wednesday, January 20, 2021 at 9:42 AM
To: user
Subject: Re: Regarding the field orde
This does seem like an odd choice, I suspect this was just a matter of
convenience of implementation since the javadoc makes no claims about field
order.
In general schema transforms don't take care to maintain a particular field
order and I'd recommend against relying on it. Instead fields should
Hi community,
I have been experimenting with Select.Flattened transform and noticed that the
field order in the flattened schema is not consistent with the order of the top
level fields from the original schema. For example, in the original schema, we
have field “foo” as the first field and it
