When a FlowFile is routed to failure, frequently there is no clear reason without looking into the actual error message. Some processors work around this by creating many different relationships, but even then frequently the generic Failure relationship also provides little guidance.
I've seen a few cases recently where processors are including the exception message as an attribute on the FlowFile when routing to failure (ExecuteStreamCommand, new PR for ExecuteSQL). Should this be a standard pattern so that it's easier for users to route failures? --Peter
