EmilyMatt opened a new issue, #18744:
URL: https://github.com/apache/datafusion/issues/18744

   ### Describe the bug
   
   Currently the field name in the lookup is hardcoded as "element", which is 
the parquet convention, arrow uses "item" in its convention, but when actual 
reading happen, the constructed name actually uses the list's field name, which 
means for "normal" list arrays(where the item is "item"), the lookup will never 
match.
   This also goes against the avro behaviour, where lists should not have a 
name anyway, which might cause issues in the future as lookup evolves(using 
refs and such)
   
   ### To Reproduce
   
   Create a reader with the following schema:
   ```
   {
             "type": "record",
             "name": "root",
             "fields": [
               {
                 "name": "items",
                 "type": {
                   "type": "array",
                   "items": {
                     "type": "record",
                     "name": "item_record",
                     "fields": [
                       {
                         "name": "id",
                         "type": "long"
                       },
                       {
                         "name": "name",
                         "type": "string"
                       }
                     ]
                   }
                 }
               }
             ]
           }
   ```
   
   Reading will fail as the schema lookup will use "element"
   
   ### Expected behavior
   
   Lists should not have sub names at all, and this should be read successfully.
   
   ### Additional context
   
   _No response_


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to