simonbence commented on a change in pull request #4948: URL: https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/4948#discussion_r667013360
########## File path: nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-scripting-bundle/nifi-scripting-processors/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/script/ScriptedRouteRecord.java ########## @@ -0,0 +1,177 @@ +/* + * Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one or more + * contributor license agreements. See the NOTICE file distributed with + * this work for additional information regarding copyright ownership. + * The ASF licenses this file to You under the Apache License, Version 2.0 + * (the "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance with + * the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at + * + * http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 + * + * Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software + * distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS, + * WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied. + * See the License for the specific language governing permissions and + * limitations under the License. + */ +package org.apache.nifi.processors.script; + +import org.apache.nifi.annotation.behavior.DynamicRelationship; +import org.apache.nifi.annotation.documentation.CapabilityDescription; +import org.apache.nifi.annotation.documentation.SeeAlso; +import org.apache.nifi.annotation.documentation.Tags; +import org.apache.nifi.components.PropertyDescriptor; +import org.apache.nifi.components.ValidationContext; +import org.apache.nifi.components.ValidationResult; +import org.apache.nifi.processor.ProcessorInitializationContext; +import org.apache.nifi.processor.Relationship; +import org.apache.nifi.processor.util.StandardValidators; + +import java.util.ArrayList; +import java.util.Collection; +import java.util.HashSet; +import java.util.List; +import java.util.Map; +import java.util.Optional; +import java.util.Set; +import java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentHashMap; +import java.util.concurrent.atomic.AtomicReference; +import java.util.stream.Collectors; + +@Tags({"record", "routing", "script", "groovy", "jython", "python", "segment", "split", "group", "organize"}) +@CapabilityDescription( + "This processor provides the ability to route the records of the incoming FlowFile using an user-provided script. " + + "The script is expected to handle a record as argument and return with a string value. " + + "The returned value defines a route. All routes are bounded to an outgoing relationship where the record will be transferred to. " + + "Relationships are defined as dynamic properties: dynamic property names are serving as the name of the route. " + + "The value of a dynamic property defines the relationship the given record will be routed into. Multiple routes might point to the same relationship. " + + "Creation of these dynamic relationship is managed by the processor. " + + "The records, which for the script returned with an unknown relationship name are routed to the \"unmatched\" relationship. " + + "The records are batched: for an incoming FlowFile, all the records routed towards a given relationship are batched into one single FlowFile." +) +@SeeAlso(classNames = { + "org.apache.nifi.processors.script.ScriptedTransformRecord", + "org.apache.nifi.processors.script.ScriptedPartitionRecord", + "org.apache.nifi.processors.script.ScriptedValidateRecord", + "org.apache.nifi.processors.script.ScriptedFilterRecord" +}) +@DynamicRelationship(name = "Name from Dynamic Property", description = "FlowFiles that match the Dynamic Property's Attribute Expression Language") +public class ScriptedRouteRecord extends ScriptedRouterProcessor<String> { Review comment: I see the value in doing this splitting and routing in one step. Both it feels "natural" to send records in different "buckets" into different paths and performance wise this might come handy with bigger amount of records. If you are not against it, I would rather keep the processor here. But I also understand your concerns and think them valid, so I see it as a possible solution to provide a much more exhaustive documentation of the processor's behaviour, with examples (in the additionalDetails). How do you feel about this approach? -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected]
