So it turned out I was wrong about about open indexes & nullable types. Is
is indeed not allowed that, is you look closely on parser's production rules
The problem appears when we're trying to create an ordinary index on
nullable field. The information about the field type is persisted in the
index metadata entry. In the open case the type is provided by the user,
whereas in the closed the type is extracted from the record's metadata
entry (where we do have a nullability attribute). We can replicate the
nullablility attribute in the index metadata entry as well, but I think
that is against the Till's original comment since this information is
becoming spread around several places. Other solution would be to carry "if
(open) {} else if (closed) {}" logic throughout the code, where we do need
nullability information, but that will be ugly.2015-08-07 11:18 GMT-07:00 Michael Carey <[email protected]>: > Q: (@Ildar) - What's the status of removing "?" from the open index DDL > and reverting that (unnecessary) part of the metadata patch? > -- Best regards, Ildar
