Hey Joe,
thanks a lot for reaching out regarding this.
I have no explanation for why this exists, but since there's not ticket
about this yet, I filed one:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-23589
I also pinged some committers who can hopefully provide some
additional context.

I would propose to continue the discussion in Jira!

Thanks again!


On Mon, Aug 2, 2021 at 3:17 PM Joseph Lorenzini <jlorenz...@gohealth.com>
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
>
>
> The avro specification supports microseconds and reviewing the source code
> in org.apache.avro.LogicalTypes seems to indicate microsecond support.
> However, the conversion code in flink (see
> org.apache.flink.formats.avro.typeutils.AvroSchemaConverter#convertToSchema)
> has this checked:
>
>
>
>                 if (precision <= 3) {
>
>                     avroLogicalType = LogicalTypes.timestampMillis();
>
>                 } else {
>
>                     throw new IllegalArgumentException(
>
>                             "Avro does not support TIMESTAMP type "
>
>                                     + "with precision: "
>
>                                     + precision
>
>                                     + ", it only supports precision less
> than 3.");
>
>                 }
>
>
>
> So it seems that flink only supports managing avro timestamps with at most
> millisecond precision. Does someone have a brief explanation about why this
> limitation exists? Depending on how complicated it is, I’d be willing to
> submit a PR to add that support in.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Joe
> Privileged/Confidential Information may be contained in this message. If
> you are not the addressee indicated in this message (or responsible for
> delivery of the message to such person), you may not copy or deliver this
> message to anyone. In such case, you should destroy this message and kindly
> notify the sender by reply email. Please advise immediately if you or your
> employer does not consent to Internet email for messages of this kind.
> Opinions, conclusions and other information in this message that do not
> relate to the official business of my firm shall be understood as neither
> given nor endorsed by it.
>

Reply via email to