Thanks Edward for your reply on this. Would you mind giving a very small example on how a struct corresponds to a Map? I am having hard time understanding what the K/V pairs in the map would look like.
Thanks again. On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 10:16 AM, Edward Capriolo <edlinuxg...@gmail.com>wrote: > Returning custom writables will not work. In most cases the methods > return Object because the types can be many things that do not fall > under a single superclass other then object. like Integer,IntWritable, > Array<IntWritable>, or Map. In your case, a struct corresponds to a > Map. > > On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 11:08 AM, kulkarni.swar...@gmail.com > <kulkarni.swar...@gmail.com> wrote: > > If someone can help understand this, I would really appreciate. > > > > On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 3:58 PM, kulkarni.swar...@gmail.com > > <kulkarni.swar...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> I am trying to write a custom ObjectInspector extending the > >> StructObjectInspector and got a little confused about the use of the > >> getStructFieldData method on the inspector. Looking at the definition > of the > >> method: > >> > >> public Object getStructFieldData(Object data, StructField fieldRef); > >> > >> I understand that the use of this method is to retrieve the specific > given > >> field from the buffer. However, what I don't understand is what is it > >> expected to return. I looked around the tests and related code and > mostly > >> stuff returned was either a LazyPrimitive or a LazyNonPrimitive, but I > >> couldn't find anything that enforces this(specially given that the > return > >> type is a plain "Object")! Does this mean that I am free to return even > my > >> custom object as a return type of this method? If so, what is the > guarantee > >> that it will be interpreted correctly down the pipeline? > >> > >> Thanks, > >> -- > >> Swarnim > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Swarnim > -- Swarnim
