[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AVRO-22?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12712320#action_12712320
]
Hong Tang commented on AVRO-22:
-------------------------------
That may not be sufficient because I do need to save the union to persistent
storage as a string, and later I would not be able to reconstruct the schema
through parse(). The asymmetric behavior between toString() and parse() is not
obvious for people to understand. Also, since programmers can still create null
records, it seems that code dealing with null named records are still there.
> Kill anonymous records or fix GenericDatumReader
> ------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: AVRO-22
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AVRO-22
> Project: Avro
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: spec
> Reporter: Raymie Stata
> Assignee: Doug Cutting
> Fix For: 1.0
>
>
> Anonymous record names are a pain, can we get rid of them?
> If not, I think I noticed a bug in GenericDatumReader.resolveExpected:
> {noformat}
> if (branch.getType() == Type.RECORD) {
> String name = branch.getName();
> if (name == null || name.equals(actual.getName()))
> return branch;
> } else
> return branch;
> {noformat}
> This doesn't seem to require that _both_ are null to match: if the name of
> {{branch}} is null and the name {{actual}} is not, then we get a match, which
> I think is a bug.
> But again, let's just get rid of null names.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
