+1 Ankit
> On 08 Jul 2014, at 15:09, Kasper Sørensen <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Well almost. It would be a Map<String,Object>, since the value-type is > unknown. For instance, if the document had nested objects or arrays, or > even a number-value, it would not always be a string value. The metadata > would say that the column type is ColumnType.MAP > > > 2014-07-08 12:56 GMT+02:00 Ankit Kumar <[email protected]>: > >> Hi Kasper, >> >> Quick question - Will the map based interpretation of the JSON be a >> Map<String,String> type and would we get this automatically in that type >> when reading the column from the row. >> >> If that's the idea then I would vote for it [+1] as we can already benefit >> from this. >> >> If I interpret it incorrect then do please enlighten me. >> >> Regards >> Ankit >> >> >> On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 12:26 PM, Kasper Sørensen < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hi guys, >>> >>> Maybe you saw that I posted a review request [1] yesterday for >> METAMODEL-38 >>> (a JSON based module for MetaModel). >>> >>> I was building this JSON module and trying to do it in a way where the >> user >>> could configure how the logical schema would look like. In some cases you >>> would want MetaModel to infer the schema based on a sample of documents >> in >>> the source, and in other cases you might want MetaModel to just treat the >>> source as a 1-column table with a MAP data type. There's probably also >>> other strategies. >>> >>> That part I felt was also very relevant for many other "schemaless" >>> datastores, such as MongoDB, CouchDB, HBase etc. So I put there >> interfaces >>> and a few standard implementations of it into the core module, and >> applied >>> it to the JSON module. If this idea is accepted, I would like to also add >>> it to MongoDB and CouchDB modules (those are a natural fit) and maybe >> also >>> HBase (slight more advanced because of the column-family concept). >>> >>> I think it makes sense to open a DISCUSS thread about this approach, >> since >>> Schema Inference is in itself a very nice distinguishing feature I think. >>> I'd like to invite anyone to share their ideas here, so that this is >> maybe >>> a place where we can make MetaModel shine. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Kasper >>> >>> [1] https://reviews.apache.org/r/23228/ >>
