[AVRO-3612] Report specific location of incompatibility in record schema

• Type: Bug
• Status: Resolved
• Priority: Major
• Resolution: Fixed
• Affects Version/s: 1.11.1
• Fix Version/s: 1.12.0
• Component/s: java
• Labels: pull-request-available

Language

java

• Assignee: Unassigned
• Reporter: Chin Huang
• Created: 22/Aug/22 04:51
• Updated: 17/Aug/23 19:23
• Resolved: 17/Aug/23 11:17

Description

Given a reader schema for a record with a field having a mandatory value:

{
  "type" : "record",
  "name" : "Account",
  "fields" : [ {
    "name" : "age",
    "type" : "int"
  } ]
}

and a writer schema for a record with a field having a nullable value:

 {
  "type" : "record",
  "name" : "Account",
  "fields" : [ {
    "name" : "age",
    "type" : [ "null", "int" ],
    "default" : null
  } ]
} 

invoking SchemaCompatibility.checkReaderWriterCompatibility(readerSchema, writerSchema) finds an incompatibility with message:

reader type: INT not compatible with writer type: NULL

and location:

/

However, I want it to instead tell me the specific location of the incompatibility in the record schema:

/fields/0/type/0

This failing unit test demonstrates the bug:

class SchemaCompatibilityTest {

  @Test
  void given_incompatibility_in_record_schema_then_found_incompatibility_location() {
    var mandatorySchema = SchemaBuilder.record("Account").fields()
        .name("age").type().intType().noDefault()
        .endRecord();
    var optionalSchema = SchemaBuilder.record("Account").fields()
        .optionalInt("age")
        .endRecord();

    var compatibility = SchemaCompatibility.checkReaderWriterCompatibility(
        mandatorySchema, optionalSchema);

    assertThat(compatibility.getType()).isEqualTo(SchemaCompatibilityType.INCOMPATIBLE);

    var incompatibility = compatibility.getResult().getIncompatibilities().get(0);
    assertThat(incompatibility.getMessage()).isEqualTo("reader type: INT not compatible with writer type: NULL");
    assertThat(incompatibility.getLocation()).isEqualTo("/fields/0/type/0");
  }
}

Issue Links

• links to: GitHub Pull Request #2449