Yellowfin 7.4 and Geometry field type (SQL Server)

VisionBI | Jurgen shared this problem 1 year ago
Defect Logged

Doesn't Yellowfin support the geometry field type from SQL Server anymore?

I've a Yellowfin 7.3+ installation that does support it and a Yellowfin 7.4 installation that doesn't. Same database, same connection, same credentials.

Comments (7)

photo
1

Hi Jurgen,

We did not remove any functionality in 7.4, so if you are experiencing problems with past functionality, chances are that it is a bug.

Can you elaborate a bit on what is going wrong, maybe include the stack trace for any error you are seeing as well?

Regards,

Nathan

photo
1

Hello Nathan,


we have developed a database with a lot of OpenData and GeoData. For the Netherlands we have information like province, city, regio, etc. with polygon data. We converted the polygon (Multipolygon, Point) data to the geometry datatype in SQL Server. This works faster (field is a lot smaller).

I've a Yellowfin 7.3+ and a Yellowfin 7.4 running, both in Microsoft Azure on Ubuntu. The 7.3+ works fine with these geometry fields, but the 7.4 doesn't. It shows empty values.

I now use the Polygon/Multipolygon/Point values again (with datatype varchar(max)), but it looks like some values are to large, so it doesn't display correct, and it's also slower than geometry.


I can make printscreens but it's just showing what I just explained above.


Regards,

Jurgen

photo
1

Hi Jurgen,

Sorry for the delay here. In my tests on the latest 7.4 this works as expected:

7ecd05b8afdf6af4ef5be0146df2d832

Am I missing anything replication wise?

Regards,

Nathan

photo
1

Hi Nathan,


I've to investigate further. I've updated the VM with the latest version of 7.4 that came out last week. Now it seems to work. So it seems to be fixed, but now I'm not sure where it came from.

What I do see is ... don't use cache fields with geometry types, then is starts waiting and waiting and it seems to corrupt the View. All fields are shown in the view (design) but are not visible when creating a report. I've manually edited the tables in the repository to delete the AssociatedId, that did the trick.


So geometry seems to work now (strange enough), but cache field causes problems.


Regards,

Jurgen

photo
1

Hi Jurgen,

First, glad to hear it is working!


In playing around with your "cache" issue, I ran into the following error when attempting to remove the cache:

YF:2017-12-11 12:07:36:ERROR (AjaxAction:error) - Error caught: com.google.gson.JsonSyntaxException: java.lang.NumberFormatException: For input string: "None"

com.google.gson.JsonSyntaxException: java.lang.NumberFormatException: For input string: "None"

at com.google.gson.internal.bind.TypeAdapters$7.read(TypeAdapters.java:227)

at com.google.gson.internal.bind.TypeAdapters$7.read(TypeAdapters.java:217)

at com.google.gson.internal.bind.ReflectiveTypeAdapterFactory$1.read(ReflectiveTypeAdapterFactory.java:129)

at com.google.gson.internal.bind.ReflectiveTypeAdapterFactory$Adapter.read(ReflectiveTypeAdapterFactory.java:220)

at com.google.gson.internal.bind.TypeAdapterRuntimeTypeWrapper.read(TypeAdapterRuntimeTypeWrapper.java:41)

at com.google.gson.internal.bind.CollectionTypeAdapterFactory$Adapter.read(CollectionTypeAdapterFactory.java:82)

at com.google.gson.internal.bind.CollectionTypeAdapterFactory$Adapter.read(CollectionTypeAdapterFactory.java:61)

at com.google.gson.Gson.fromJson(Gson.java:887)

at com.google.gson.Gson.fromJson(Gson.java:852)

at com.google.gson.Gson.fromJson(Gson.java:801)

at com.hof.mi.models.view.ViewFieldFormatModelBeanImpl.fromJsonArray(ViewFieldFormatModelBeanImpl.java:28)

at com.hof.mi.web.action.MIViewFieldsAjaxAction.runAction(MIViewFieldsAjaxAction.java:275)

at com.hof.web.action.AjaxAction.execute(AjaxAction.java:155)

Does this look like what you saw?

As this is indeed a bug, I have raised it as such.

Regards,

Nathan

photo
1

Hi Nathan,


good to see this is registered as a bug. I don't have the loggings available at the moment to see if I have the same error messages. It's on a VM on Ubuntu .. somewhere.


I know how to work around it at the moment, how to remove the cache fields. As long as I don't use the cache fields it works fine.


Regards,

Jurgen

photo
1

Hi Jurgen,

Sounds good. I will let you know when any progress has been made on this defect.

Regards,

Nathan

photo