[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AVRO-1877?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15367651#comment-15367651
]
Yibing Shi edited comment on AVRO-1877 at 7/8/16 1:14 PM:
----------------------------------------------------------
Hi [~rdblue], it was my fault. I accidentally deleted a part of method
{{javaUnbox}}. I am not sure how it happened though.
Before AVRO-1847, the javaUnbox method is like below:
{code}
public String javaType(Schema schema) {
Conversion<?> conversion = SPECIFIC
.getConversionFor(schema.getLogicalType());
if (conversion != null) {
return conversion.getConvertedType().getName();
}
switch (schema.getType()) {
......
{code}
However, AVRO-1847 somehow deleted the conversion part and made it like below:
{code}
public String javaType(Schema schema) {
switch (schema.getType()) {
......
{code}
As a result, for logical type timestamp_ms, date and time_ms, method
{{javaUnbox}} returns "int" instead of JODA classes, which breaks the generated
Specific Record.
I submitted a patch in this JIRA. Instead of using the original code, I rely on
method {{javaType}} to do the conversion to avoid maintain the same code in 2
places, especially when now we have more and more parameters to control whether
to use upper level classes for a logical type. I also added 2 unit tests in
this patch to cover this function. Please let me know whether you think this is
appropriate or not.
was (Author: yibing):
Hi [~rdblue], it was my fault. I accidentally deleted a part of method
{{javaUnbox}}. I am not sure how it happened though.
Before AVRO-1847, the javaUnbox method is like below:
{code}
public String javaType(Schema schema) {
Conversion<?> conversion = SPECIFIC
.getConversionFor(schema.getLogicalType());
if (conversion != null) {
return conversion.getConvertedType().getName();
}
switch (schema.getType()) {
......
{code}
However, AVRO-1847 somehow deleted the conversion part and made it like below:
{code}
public String javaType(Schema schema) {
switch (schema.getType()) {
......
{code}
I submitted a patch in this JIRA. Instead of using the original code, I rely on
method {{javaType}} to do the conversion to avoid maintain the same code in 2
places, especially when now we have more and more parameters to control whether
to use upper level classes for a logical type. I also added 2 unit tests in
this patch to cover this function. Please let me know whether you think this is
appropriate or not.
> AVRO-1847 accidentally breaks javaUnbox method in SpecificCompiler
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: AVRO-1877
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AVRO-1877
> Project: Avro
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: java
> Affects Versions: 1.9.0
> Reporter: Yibing Shi
> Priority: Blocker
> Attachments: AVRO-1877.1.patch
>
>
> AVRO-1847 accidentally removes the logical type conversion logic in method
> {{SpecificCompiler.javaUnbox}}, which breaks the data time type compiling in
> specific compiler.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
