Going back to your initial question... why don't you wish to include "foo" within nested "parent"? I am not quite getting it here. In my case, the nested records were of substantial size including dozens of fields, which then had nested records. It did not scale to write out AVSC definitions for the data model.
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 8:28 PM, Software Dev <[email protected]>wrote: > Thanks for the input. I'm guessing then the above problem can only solved > with IDL and not AVSC? > > > On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 11:45 AM, Lewis John Mcgibbney < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Hey, >> Did you check out the IDL documentation? >> http://avro.apache.org/docs/current/idl.html >> I had similar data modeling issues a while back and this helped out A LOT. >> hth >> >> >> On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 6:58 PM, Software Dev >> <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> Is there anyway to include the fields of another schema into our schema >>> WITHOUT it creating a nested record? >>> >>> >>> { >>> "type": "record", >>> "name": "Parent", >>> "fields" : [ >>> { >>> "name": "foo", >>> "type": "string" >>> } >>> ] >>> } >>> >>> { >>> "type": "record", >>> "name": "Child", >>> "fields" : [ >>> { >>> "name": "bar", >>> "type": "string" >>> }, >>> // I dont want it nested like this >>> // { >>> // "name": "parent", >>> // "type": "Parent" >>> // } >>> ] >>> } >>> >>> So in this example is there a way to have child include both the "bar" >>> field as well as "foo" without it nested under parent? >>> >>> Thanks >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> *Lewis* >> > > -- *Lewis*
