[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-361?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15247164#comment-15247164
 ] 

ASF GitHub Bot commented on NIFI-361:
-------------------------------------

Github user joewitt commented on the pull request:

    https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/354#issuecomment-211724253
  
    Oleg off-list pointed out the finer concerns with the member variable.  
While it seems pretty far out it also seems like it is accurate.  In reading 
https://docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/essential/concurrency/atomic.html and 
https://docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/essential/concurrency/memconsist.html
    
    And indeed I cannot think of anything the framework is doing with thread 
management or how those lifecycle calls work that would enforce/guarantee a 
happens-before relationship for these processor member variables.  @markap14 
can you? 
    
    That said the licensing and thread safety issue of the transform itself are 
still needing to be addressed.


> Create Processors to mutate JSON data
> -------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: NIFI-361
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-361
>             Project: Apache NiFi
>          Issue Type: New Feature
>            Reporter: Aldrin Piri
>            Assignee: Oleg Zhurakousky
>            Priority: Minor
>             Fix For: 1.0.0, 0.7.0
>
>
> Creating a separate issue to track these as a pull request has been submitted 
> for related issue NIFI-356.
> Also backed by JsonPath, processors should facilitate through specification 
> of user-defined properties:
> * Add - identify path and add key/value pair
> ** Handle if the path is an array, this would ignore the name specified and 
> just add the value to the collection
> * Remove - delete the element at the specified path
> * Update - change the value for the given path to a provided value
> Need to determine if objects/arrays make sense for values or if they are 
> needed.
> While it would be nice to be able to execute several operations per processor 
> instance, it may be hard to capture all the relevant information needed for 
> multiple operations in one processor configuration in a user friendly context.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

Reply via email to