3-union fields

[Alfonso Nishikawa <al...@gmail.com>]

Hi!

Answering Carlos, a little spark came to me.
Do all backends support 3-union fields? Because I think I saw that MongoDB
has the tests ignored.
HBase supports them.

Do you think the 3-union fields are interesting as a feature or we should
get rid of them completely?

I remember standing for them with perseverance, but now I start to doubt.
Maybe no one will ever use them. Maybe they are useless and a burden in
overall.

Do we get rid of them so the data handling get a bit easier?


Please comment on the backends you know, and your oppinion :)

Thanks!!!

Regards,

Alfonso

Re: 3-union fields

[Renato Marroquín Mogrovejo <re...@gmail.com>]

Hi Alfonso,

I think while there is people using JSON with multi-typed attributes, then
we should. But in general, I don't think people use them too much, it's
funny that people rather have more "structured" data.
So I'd say that if supporting them for a few a users makes the rest of
development overly complex, slow, then we might be torn in doing it but if
it is something easy that will make a few users happy, then I'm +1.
Maybe the Nutch committers/users in the list can say if they have seen a
lot of these JSON data and give us some input on it.


Renato M.

2018-06-06 12:10 GMT+02:00 Alfonso Nishikawa <al...@gmail.com>:

> Hi!
>
> Answering Carlos, a little spark came to me.
> Do all backends support 3-union fields? Because I think I saw that MongoDB
> has the tests ignored.
> HBase supports them.
>
> Do you think the 3-union fields are interesting as a feature or we should
> get rid of them completely?
>
> I remember standing for them with perseverance, but now I start to doubt.
> Maybe no one will ever use them. Maybe they are useless and a burden in
> overall.
>
> Do we get rid of them so the data handling get a bit easier?
>
>
> Please comment on the backends you know, and your oppinion :)
>
> Thanks!!!
>
> Regards,
>
> Alfonso
>