Hi,
I'm getting the error:
The specified field: USAGEHOUR does not exist in the view adapated schema
(with the type-error!)
I'm getting this error in a filter stage. This used to work correctly sequential, but I've now made this parallel on a sorted hash partition. This field is not used as hashkey, but is is used to filter for the outputs. It's also on 3 of the 4 outputs.
any idea?
The specified field does not exist in the view adapted schem
Moderators: chulett, rschirm, roy
-
- Participant
- Posts: 54607
- Joined: Wed Oct 23, 2002 10:52 pm
- Location: Sydney, Australia
- Contact:
this is the entire error message.
I've allready got it solved. I've removed the partitioning and sorting from the input of the filter stage and preceded it with a sort stage doing exactly the same thing.
To answer some of your questions:
- I'm not using modify stage, there is a transformer and a lookup stage before the filter(the field is created from a function in the transformer)
-filter condition USAGEHOUR<12 for link 0, >12 for link 1
-this is the first error in the log, it is followed by likewise errors in the following stages, but I disregarded them, since they're probably the same thing.
I've allready got it solved. I've removed the partitioning and sorting from the input of the filter stage and preceded it with a sort stage doing exactly the same thing.
To answer some of your questions:
- I'm not using modify stage, there is a transformer and a lookup stage before the filter(the field is created from a function in the transformer)
-filter condition USAGEHOUR<12 for link 0, >12 for link 1
-this is the first error in the log, it is followed by likewise errors in the following stages, but I disregarded them, since they're probably the same thing.
-
- Participant
- Posts: 54607
- Joined: Wed Oct 23, 2002 10:52 pm
- Location: Sydney, Australia
- Contact:
Well done. Why does this work? Why did you think to try it?Telenet wrote: I've allready got it solved. I've removed the partitioning and sorting from the input of the filter stage and preceded it with a sort stage doing exactly the same thing.
IBM Software Services Group
Any contribution to this forum is my own opinion and does not necessarily reflect any position that IBM may hold.
Any contribution to this forum is my own opinion and does not necessarily reflect any position that IBM may hold.
actually I have no clue why it works, I thought the sort stage just has extra functionality, but doesn't work any different from sorting at the input of another stage.
reason why I tried it is to find out if the problem was in the filtering or in the sorting, since the error is on a stage. by adding a sort stage I would get a more clear error.
reason why I tried it is to find out if the problem was in the filtering or in the sorting, since the error is on a stage. by adding a sort stage I would get a more clear error.
-
- Participant
- Posts: 54607
- Joined: Wed Oct 23, 2002 10:52 pm
- Location: Sydney, Australia
- Contact: