>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AVRO-2702
>>
>> this should be solved in 1.10 (which it is not, incorrect code is still
>> generated). And if someone (like myself) is bound to 1.9.2 because of
>> confluent, there is no fix for this minor version branch
, which is just awesome.
po 21. 6. 2021 v 11:17 odesílatel Martin Mucha napsal:
> It seems, that transition 1.8.2->1.9.2 brings backwards incomatibility and
>
>
> String
>
> which did work to change generation from CharSequence to String, does not
> work any
It seems, that transition 1.8.2->1.9.2 brings backwards incomatibility and
String
which did work to change generation from CharSequence to String, does not
work any more. Within 15 minutes search I'm not unable to find literary any
documentation of this plugin, so I don't know if
ve fields from the schemas without
> having to coordinate deploys and juggle iron-clad contract interchange
> formats. It's not meant for wild rewrites of the contract IDLs on active
> running services!
>
> All the best for 2020, anyone else who happens to be reading mailing list
> email
ley
> http://lee.hambley.name/
> +49 (0) 170 298 5667
>
>
> On Mon, 30 Dec 2019 at 17:26, Martin Mucha wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> I'm relatively new to avro, and I'm still struggling with getting schema
>> evolution and related issues. But today it should be simple
Hi,
I'm relatively new to avro, and I'm still struggling with getting schema
evolution and related issues. But today it should be simple question.
What is recommended naming of types if we want to use schema evolution?
Should namespace contain some information about version of schema? Or
should
Hi, I encounter weird behavior and have no idea how to fix that. Any
suggestions welcomed.
The issue revolves around union type on top level, which I personally
dislike and consider to be hack, but I understand the motivation behind it:
someone wanted to declare N types withing single avsc file
ase (a kafka topic) if I remember right. Loose that database and you
> cannot read your kafka topics.
>
> So you have to use some other encoder, homegrown or not that embeds either
> the full schema in every message (expensive) of some id. Does this make
> sense?
>
> /svante
&
byte) to the binary avro. Thus using the schema registry again
> you can get the writer schema.
>
> /Svante
>
> On Thu, Aug 1, 2019, 15:30 Martin Mucha wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> just one more question, not strictly related to the subject.
>>
>> Initially
the record. I really do not know how to do that, I'm pretty
sure I never saw this anywhere, and I cannot find it anywhere. But in
principle it must be possible, since reader need not necessarily have any
control of which schema writer used.
thanks a lot.
M.
út 30. 7. 2019 v 18:16 odesílatel Martin Mucha
Reader<>(Simple.getClassSchema(),
> SimpleV2.getClassSchema());
> Decoder decoder = DecoderFactory.get().binaryDecoder(v1AsBytes, null);
> SimpleV2 v2 = datumReader.read(null, decoder);
>
> assertThat(v2.getId(), is(1));
> assertThat(v2.getName(), is(new U
nput, just when a field
> is known to be in the reader schema but missing from the original
> writer.
>
> You may have more luck reading the GenericRecord with a
> GenericDatumReader with both schemas, and using the
> `convertToJson(record)`.
>
> I hope this is useful
as
napsal:
> It is possible to do it with a custom JsonDecoder.
>
> I wrote one that does this at:
> https://github.com/zolyfarkas/avro/blob/trunk/lang/java/avro/src/main/java/org/apache/avro/io/ExtendedJsonDecoder.java
>
>
> hope it helps.
>
>
> —Z
>
> On
Hi,
is it possible by design to deserialize JSON with schema having optional
value?
Schema:
{
"type" : "record",
"name" : "UserSessionEvent",
"namespace" : "events",
"fields" : [ {
"name" : "username",
"type" : "string"
}, {
"name" : "errorData",
"type" : [ "null", "string" ],
ore.)
>
> So, right now, even the top level is failing the spec:
>
> IV) valid (0 ARecords):
> { }
>
> V) valid (2 ARecords):
> {
> "id": "...",
> "B": {
> "C": "..."
> }
> } ,
> "id": ".
quot;fields": [
> { "name": "B", "type": "string" },
> { "name": "C", "type": "string" }
> ]
> }
> }
> ]
> }
>
> This gives me 0 or more ARecord
ng"
}
]
}
}
]
}
does not require C. And that's not what I want ... I'd like optional B, and
once user provide B, then B.C is required.
Martin.
2017-11-27 15:06 GMT+01:00 Dan Schmitt <dan.schm...@gmail.com>:
> "name": "B",
> &
Hi,
I have this avro schema:
{
"name" : "ARecord",
"type" : "record",
"namespace" : "A",
"fields" : [
{"name": "id", "type": "string" },
{
"name": "B",
"type": ["null", {
"type": "record",
"name": "BRecord",
"fields": [
{
18 matches
Mail list logo
