Github user cestella commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/metron/pull/1083
You got it [METRON-1655](https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/METRON-1655)
---
Github user ottobackwards commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/metron/pull/1083
Why don't you create a jira for the REGEXP_MATCH
---
Github user nickwallen commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/metron/pull/1083
A big thumbs up to not embedding Stellar directly in JSON. I think that
would solve a number of problems.
---
Github user cestella commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/metron/pull/1083
I think a decent UI that would make this a hell of a lot easier, but also
not embedding stellar in JSON would help a lot. Something like:
```
match {
REGEXP_MATCH(pix_type,
Github user ottobackwards commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/metron/pull/1083
" Ultimately, I consider this a stop-gap."
Yes. What we are basically doing is writing a meta language on top of
stellar. In this case we are using that to make up for the meta
Github user cestella commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/metron/pull/1083
Sure, so the difference in the parser chaining example would be between the
following
# Stellar
```
"fieldTransformations" : [
{
"transformation" : "STELLAR"
Github user nickwallen commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/metron/pull/1083
Can you provide a "routing in Stellar" versus "routing with REGEX_ROUTING"
example that highlights the benefits of this approach?
This go against our current trajectory of "do
Github user cestella commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/metron/pull/1083
Ok, I updated with manual testing plan and I think I've made the changes
requested. Let me know what you guys think.
---
Github user cestella commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/metron/pull/1083
@ottobackwards Makes sense; I made the change and percolated it to
METRON-1644 aka #1084
---
Github user ottobackwards commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/metron/pull/1083
+1 to SELECT
What you are saying is SET FIELD to X if SELECT.
It would be SWITCH if it were a different X per matching regex
---
Github user cestella commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/metron/pull/1083
@ottobackwards Yeah, my history of really crappy naming continues. How
about `REGEX_SELECT` or `REGEX_SWITCH`?
---
Github user ottobackwards commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/metron/pull/1083
I am not sure ROUTING is a good name for this. This is more like a SELECT.
---
12 matches
Mail list logo
