[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-5579?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16866277#comment-16866277
]
Ji Liu commented on ARROW-5579:
-------------------------------
[[email protected]] I am afraid the above PR did not really shade the
flatbuffer dependency, I am not quite familiar with
maven-shade-plugin([https://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-shade-plugin/]),
correct me if I am wrong:
If we want to shade a dependency, we should follow the next steps:
# User maven-shade-plugin and add include tags for flatbuffer
# Add relocations to rename the package.
In the above PR, we use <exclude> tag and seems this plugin will not process
this dependency?
If we use relocations to rename packages it will cause new problems and I don't
know how to solve:
_/org/apache/arrow/vector/types/pojo/ArrowType.java:[239,46] 错误: 不兼容的类型:
com.google.flatbuffers.FlatBufferBuilder无法转换为
arrow.format.com.google.flatbuffers.FlatBufferBuilder_
Seems the direct flatbuffer dependency in arrow-vector is not compatible with
renamed dependency in arrow-format.
What do you think?
> [Java] shade flatbuffer dependency
> ----------------------------------
>
> Key: ARROW-5579
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-5579
> Project: Apache Arrow
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: Java
> Reporter: Pindikura Ravindra
> Assignee: Ji Liu
> Priority: Major
> Labels: pull-request-available
> Fix For: 0.14.0
>
> Time Spent: 2h
> Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> Reported in a [github issue|[https://github.com/apache/arrow/issues/4489]]
>
> After some [discussion|https://github.com/google/flatbuffers/issues/5368]
> with the Flatbuffers maintainer, it appears that FB generated code is not
> guaranteed to be compatible with _any other_ version of the runtime library
> other than the exact same version of the flatc used to compile it.
> This makes depending on flatbuffers in a library (like arrow) quite risky, as
> if an app depends on any other version of FB, either directly or
> transitively, it's likely the versions will clash at some point and you'll
> see undefined behaviour at runtime.
> Shading the dependency looks to me the best way to avoid this.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
