avro-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Francis Galiegue <fgalie...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Question about Avro "records"
Date Wed, 27 Feb 2013 22:14:12 GMT
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 10:54 PM, Pankaj Shroff <shroffg@gmail.com> wrote:
> That doesn't seem the case specially because if you define a record with a
> bunch of optional fields, then you would end up with an empty object (or
> rather an object with null values for its fields). Am I misunderstanding
> your question?
>

OK, I have probably misworded the question. Let's say I have a record
defining fields "a" and "b". For simplicity, their permissible values
are ints.

As I understand it:

{ "a": 1 }

is not legal since "b" is not provided.

This:

{ "a": 1, "b": 2, "c": 3 }

is not legal either since "c" is not defined.

BUT: { "a": 1 } can be legal IF a default value is provided for "b".

Am I getting this right, partially right, completely wrong?

-- 
Francis Galiegue, fgaliegue@gmail.com
JSON Schema in Java: http://json-schema-validator.herokuapp.com

Mime
View raw message