[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-3155?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16205201#comment-16205201
]
kislay kumar edited comment on NIFI-3155 at 10/15/17 4:55 PM:
--------------------------------------------------------------
[~mcgilman] I would like to work on the issue. This would be my first
contribution to the project.
I have been using Nifi in a production scale system for 2 years have sufficient
background on it.
Please let me know if I should start devoting my energy in this direction. Else
please suggest a right jira to me.
Thanks
was (Author: kislayosho):
[~mcgilman] I would like to work on the issue. This would be my first
contribution to the project.
I have been using Nifi in a production scale system for 2 years have sufficient
background on it.
Please let me know if should start devoting my energy in this direction. Else
please suggest a right jira to me.
Thanks
> Remote Group Port UUIDs
> -----------------------
>
> Key: NIFI-3155
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-3155
> Project: Apache NiFi
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Core Framework
> Reporter: Matt Gilman
> Priority: Critical
>
> Remote Group Ports assume the UUID of the port on the target instance. This
> is critical for retaining which port the connection is associated with.
> However, this is problematic for any flow which contains multiple RPGs
> pointed to the same target instance. Associating the underlying component
> when only an ID is known (ie provenance) is impossible as the UUID is
> ambiguous.
> This issue also exists for self-referencing RPGs but is mitigated with extra
> logic around these troublesome scenarios. For instance, we can differentiate
> the Remote Group Port from the Root Group Port of a self-referencing RPG by
> looking at the component type. However, this isn't possible with multiple
> RPGs referencing the same target instance.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
