Hi Maria, It’s actually something that should not have worked in PDI either. It’s by accident that it does. You get giant warnings when merging 2 streams that do not line up. So this will be an opportunity to clean up those errors.
But you have me a bit confused about the duplicate field name, the error in the ticket might be valid that there is something wrong in a newly created field resulting in _1. But that is not related to merging 2 streams. Kr, Hans On Thu, 26 Jun 2025 at 09:01, Maria Lim <marialy...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks Hans. > > Do you mean, a redesign of the pipeline is inevitable for this case? Do > you know if this is a known issue (duplicate field name not correctly > passed) for migrated PDI job only, or for all HOP pipelines? > > Kind regards, > Maria > > On Thu, Jun 26, 2025 at 4:27 PM Hans Van Akelyen < > hans.van.akel...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi Maria, >> >> By default when merging streams the layout should be the same on both >> sides. Alternatively when merging 2 streams with different lay-outs you can >> use the stream schema merge transform >> >> https://hop.apache.org//manual/latest/pipeline/transforms/streamschemamerge.html >> >> This transform will make sure the result is valid. >> >> Kr, >> Hans >> >> >> On Thu, 26 Jun 2025 at 07:39, Maria Lim <marialy...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi Apache HOP Support Team, >>> >>> I’m currently exploring the migration of ETLs from PDI to Apache HOP. >>> >>> While testing a pipeline, I encountered a failure at the "Select >>> values" transform following the merging of two streams. The error >>> indicates that a field with the suffix "_1" could not be found—this >>> corresponds to a duplicated fieldname resulting from the merge. >>> >>> The issue appears to align with the one reported on GitHub last year: >>> https://github.com/apache/hop/issues/3849 >>> >>> After reviewing that discussion, I attempted to rebuild the pipeline >>> entirely in HOP, hoping for a different result. Unfortunately, the >>> issue persists. >>> >>> Aside from known workarounds like renaming fields prior to the merge >>> to avoid duplication, is there a more direct or quicker fix available >>> for this behaviour? >>> >>> Appreciate your insights and support. >>> >>> Kind regards, >>> Maria >>> >>
