t; > > the order that will be invalid under Avro 1.9+. I noticed because I've
> > > > been
> > > > > using that to copy-paste schemas that were "almost right" so I could
> > > > > manually fix them.
> > > > >
> > > >
I noticed because I've
> > > been
> > > > using that to copy-paste schemas that were "almost right" so I could
> > > > manually fix them.
> > > >
> > > > I guess that inferred schemas should be fine if the inferring logic is
> > > > als
ncy, but for any cached schemas and my own
> > > manually saved schemas this will be somewhat painful.
> > > My use case for manually saving inferred schemas is mostly database
> > > migration where some inferred "choice" fields are not supported for the
> >
t; > target database.
> >
> > Hope this helps,
> >
> > Isha
> >
> > -Oorspronkelijk bericht-
> > Van: Mike Thomsen
> > Verzonden: donderdag 7 april 2022 12:11
> > Aan: dev@nifi.apache.org
> > Onderwerp: Need some feedback
gt;
> -Oorspronkelijk bericht-
> Van: Mike Thomsen
> Verzonden: donderdag 7 april 2022 12:11
> Aan: dev@nifi.apache.org
> Onderwerp: Need some feedback on how upgrading Avro might cause problems
>
> Thread is here for full details:
>
> https://eur03.safelinks.prote
e not supported for the target database.
Hope this helps,
Isha
-Oorspronkelijk bericht-
Van: Mike Thomsen
Verzonden: donderdag 7 april 2022 12:11
Aan: dev@nifi.apache.org
Onderwerp: Need some feedback on how upgrading Avro might cause problems
Thread is here f
Thread is here for full details:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/5900#pullrequestreview-922490039
It looks like Avro 1.8's schema parser may have been more lenient (or
buggy) in enforcing the specification with respect to the ordering of
a union for a nullable type. 1.9.X and higher are
