Hi Andy, Thank you for reaching out. I had glanced at MiNiFi and we will certainly be using it for collection/gathering.
I was more thinking of the "round-trip element" where an external process both receive and return FlowFiles as a single transaction in the same way internal processes work. We have built our own bridge which fails in reception unless FlowFiles can be processed and passed to an input port so we are OK now. All the best, Stefán On Sat, Dec 3, 2016 at 3:48 AM, Andy LoPresto <[email protected]> wrote: > Stefán, > > It sounds like you figured it out and understand the port strategy now. If > you are still interested in communicating between distinct nodes without > running a full NiFi installation on each, you should take a look at the > subproject MiNiFi [1] which provides both Java and C++ “agents” — > lightweight footprint “guest” processes which can run on limited hardware > and perform a subset of the full NiFi behavior (no UI, etc.) and connect > back over the Site to Site protocol to a full NiFi instance. Your original > question may no longer apply given your new understanding, but if it does, > this may be the solution you’re looking for. > > [1] https://nifi.apache.org/minifi/index.html > > Andy LoPresto > [email protected] > *[email protected] <[email protected]>* > PGP Fingerprint: 70EC B3E5 98A6 5A3F D3C4 BACE 3C6E F65B 2F7D EF69 > > On Dec 2, 2016, at 2:31 AM, Stefán Baxter <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hi again, > > This was indeed silly. When asking I was assuming that Processes were > available remotely, not "just" the IN/OUT ports. > > I can see how the port-only strategy is a good thing. > > All the best, > -Stefán > > On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 9:03 PM, Stefán Baxter <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hi, > > This may be a silly question, please forgive me. > > We are trying integrating our platform with Nifi in an as efficient way as > possible and we have been implementing the same "port based" integrations > as used for stream processing solutions. > > The nifi-site-to-site-client library makes this very easy but the IN or > OUT port approach seems slightly "disjoint", at least in comparison with > remote process groups which support both IN and OUT > > And here is the question. Is there a library available which would allow a > solution to provide a Nifi compatable "Remote Process Group" service > without being a complete Nifi server? > > All the best, > -Stefán > > >
