Agreed, this needs improvement. For starters, can you be more specific on
the properties for shard/retention size? Are these related to specific
settings (properties) in nifi.properties?

Also, clarifying what I stated earlier: after restarting NiFi, NEW
provenance events display correctly. Any previous events still do not
display. This is indicating the events are not being written to the
repository.

Potentially relevant settings are
nifi.provenance.repository.max.storage.time=24 hours
nifi.provenance.repository.max.storage.size=1 GB
nifi.provenance.repository.rollover.time=30 secs
nifi.provenance.repository.rollover.size=100MB
nifi.provenance.repository.alway.sync=false

The provenance_repository is only 140K on disk.


On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 11:32 AM Joe Witt <[email protected]> wrote:

> Mark
>
> I believe I've seen this as well - or I'm confusing issues - but as I
> recall it had to do with settings for shard size/retention size not making
> sense.  As an admin configuring it though you cannot really see/reason over
> this and I dont think we log anything about it (could be mistaken).  This
> definitely needs to be improved so that if bad settings are used then the
> user is warned and possibly startup is cancelled.
>
> Thanks
>
> On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 11:25 AM Mark Bean <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > There have been several times on different NiFi instances where the
> > Provenance Query results are not shown. It appears as if there are no
> > provenance events at all. However, after restarting NiFi, the events
> > correctly appear.
> >
> > This has been observed in 1.8.0 and 1.9.2. There is a JIRA ticket [1]
> which
> > may be indicating the same issue in 1.7.1. It is still open.
> >
> > I have only observed the problem, but not dug too deeply to diagnose
> yet. I
> > was only able to identify the provenance repo as the
> > WriteAheadProvenanceRepository.
> >
> > I am curious if anyone has experienced similar behavior?
> >
> > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-5804
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Mark
> >
>

Reply via email to