joewitt commented on PR #8094: URL: https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/8094#issuecomment-1866733000
Ahh that discussion context is helpful - would make sense to have that already linked in either the JIRA itself or this PR. If it was there and I missed it sorry about that. Otherwise, we need to put links to such good/useful discussions on these to help others who might review later. To the issue at hand, I do not share the view we should create a different event type here. The meaning of 'SEND' is that NiFi is responsible for having taken the bits of a thing and sent it to some external system. That is precisely what is happening here. Now there is value in knowing as well then that NiFi itself never actually stored the bits. This is known though already from the provenance trail of this object. Presumably it never had a CREATE/RECEIVE and the bytes will of course have never been populated other than perhaps a link/reference. Given there was already a decent discussion and some apparent consensus and clearly this was a lot of work I am not saying I am a -1 on this but it does add more code/more maintenance/more semantics and I'm not clear what the value add will be in that sense. If the issue of size is being worked around here then ideally we'd have a different/simpler answer. If we continue with this as-is the description of a SEND should ensure devs use that when sending content from within NiFi to an external system and an upload only when sending external content to an external system. Because as written in teh docs/guide right now UPLOAD looks like a subcase of SEND which it is not. -- 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]
