It looks like only the RecordSchema has implemented the getField method
getField(String fieldname)
If I were to use the example schema, (map without embedded in a record),
I can't use the getField method because the MapSchema does not implement the
getField method, so, the following doesn't work
Schema s = Schema.parse(new File(MY_SCHEMA_FILE);
GenericRecord t = new GenericData.Record(s.getField("hi").schema());
So, I am curious how to create the GenericRecord instance to populate
fields a and b of the record before inserting into the Map?
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 12:16 PM, Scott Carey <[email protected]>wrote:
> In general you don't need to wrap an unnamed complex type (map, array,
> union) in a record.
>
> Some language APIs might not support these 'naked' types with the same
> level of ease that they support named ones.
>
> Note in your schema below the "name" field -- "mapping" is completely
> ignored. Maps don't have names.
>
> Other 'nameless' schemas are ones with a single intrinsic data type, like:
>
> { "type": "int" }
>
>
> On 4/13/11 9:52 AM, "Weishung Chung" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I have a question about Avro schema. Does the map type need to be embedded
> in a record? Could I have a schema like this without embedding the map in a
> record?
>
> {
> "name": "mapping",
> "type": "map",
> "values":{
> "type":"record",
> "name":"hi",
> "fields":[
> {"name":"a","type":"string"},
> {"name":"b","type":"string"}
> ]
> }
> }
>
>
> Thank you
>
>
