[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AVRO-656?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12997592#comment-12997592
]
Doug Cutting commented on AVRO-656:
-----------------------------------
Maybe we should not permit nulls to match anything but nulls and remove the old
constructors, forcing folks to upgrade. Null names are currently used by RPC
parameter list record schemas, so we can't remove them for records, but we I
think we can remove them altogether for enum and fixed.
> writing unions with multiple records, fixed or enums can choose wrong branch
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: AVRO-656
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AVRO-656
> Project: Avro
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: java
> Affects Versions: 1.4.0
> Reporter: Doug Cutting
> Assignee: Doug Cutting
> Priority: Blocker
> Fix For: 1.5.0
>
> Attachments: AVRO-656.patch, AVRO-656.patch, AVRO-656.patch,
> AVRO-656.patch, AVRO-656.patch, AVRO-656.patch
>
>
> According to the specification, a union may contain multiple instances of a
> named type, provided they have different names. There are several bugs in
> the Java implementation of this when writing data:
> - for record, only the short-name of the record is checked, so the branch
> for a record of the same name in a different namespace may be used by mistake
> - for enum and fixed, the name of the record is not checked, so the first
> enum or fixed in the union will always be assumed when writing. in many
> cases this may cause the wrong data to be written, potentially corrupting
> output.
> This is not a regression. This has never been implemented correctly by Java.
> Python and Ruby never check names, but rather perform a full, recursive
> validation of content.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
