You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Jul 14, 2023. It is now read-only.
Following link from Python Storage SDK and posting here.
Service
Table
Which version of the SDK was used? Please provide the output of pip freeze.
azure-storage 0.36.0
What problem was encountered?
SDK does not work as expected when dealing with Int32 / Int64 values in table storage.
If you assign an 'int' to a table column read from storage that is Int32 the SDK happily writes it back as Int64. This breaks expected behaviour and seems to be the result of the default Int64 change in 0.31.0.
The majority of other language SDKs still default to Int32 so integration into a solution that leverages table storage through various other languages results in unexpected issues too.
Have you found a mitigation/solution?
Yes. You must explicitly assign the 'int' value to the 'value' property of the inbound entity column rather than simply assigning the 'int' to the column. This is clunky to code with.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Following link from Python Storage SDK and posting here.
Service
Table
Which version of the SDK was used? Please provide the output of
pip freeze
.azure-storage 0.36.0
What problem was encountered?
SDK does not work as expected when dealing with Int32 / Int64 values in table storage.
If you assign an 'int' to a table column read from storage that is Int32 the SDK happily writes it back as Int64. This breaks expected behaviour and seems to be the result of the default Int64 change in 0.31.0.
The majority of other language SDKs still default to Int32 so integration into a solution that leverages table storage through various other languages results in unexpected issues too.
Have you found a mitigation/solution?
Yes. You must explicitly assign the 'int' value to the 'value' property of the inbound entity column rather than simply assigning the 'int' to the column. This is clunky to code with.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: