[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-4709?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16296526#comment-16296526
]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on NIFI-4709:
--------------------------------------
GitHub user ijokarumawak opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/2354
NIFI-4709: Fixed ListAzureBlobStorage timestamp precision handling.
Thank you for submitting a contribution to Apache NiFi.
In order to streamline the review of the contribution we ask you
to ensure the following steps have been taken:
### For all changes:
- [x] Is there a JIRA ticket associated with this PR? Is it referenced
in the commit message?
- [x] Does your PR title start with NIFI-XXXX where XXXX is the JIRA number
you are trying to resolve? Pay particular attention to the hyphen "-" character.
- [x] Has your PR been rebased against the latest commit within the target
branch (typically master)?
- [x] Is your initial contribution a single, squashed commit?
### For code changes:
- [ ] Have you ensured that the full suite of tests is executed via mvn
-Pcontrib-check clean install at the root nifi folder?
- [ ] Have you written or updated unit tests to verify your changes?
- [ ] If adding new dependencies to the code, are these dependencies
licensed in a way that is compatible for inclusion under [ASF
2.0](http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-a)?
- [ ] If applicable, have you updated the LICENSE file, including the main
LICENSE file under nifi-assembly?
- [ ] If applicable, have you updated the NOTICE file, including the main
NOTICE file found under nifi-assembly?
- [ ] If adding new Properties, have you added .displayName in addition to
.name (programmatic access) for each of the new properties?
### For documentation related changes:
- [ ] Have you ensured that format looks appropriate for the output in
which it is rendered?
### Note:
Please ensure that once the PR is submitted, you check travis-ci for build
issues and submit an update to your PR as soon as possible.
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:
$ git pull https://github.com/ijokarumawak/nifi nifi-4709
Alternatively you can review and apply these changes as the patch at:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/2354.patch
To close this pull request, make a commit to your master/trunk branch
with (at least) the following in the commit message:
This closes #2354
----
commit d4ece742e111a8d0fc7292d5960c055c29fca215
Author: Koji Kawamura <[email protected]>
Date: 2017-12-19T09:25:23Z
NIFI-4709: Fixed ListAzureBlobStorage timestamp precision handling.
----
> ListAzureBlobStorage misunderstands target system timestamp precision as
> Minutes
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: NIFI-4709
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-4709
> Project: Apache NiFi
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Extensions
> Affects Versions: 1.4.0
> Reporter: Koji Kawamura
> Assignee: Koji Kawamura
>
> NIFI-4069 added target system timestamp detection for ListXXXX processors.
> Defaults to auto detection. Most sub classes added 'Target System Timestamp
> Precision' to their 'getSupportedPropertyDescriptors' method. But
> ListAzureBlobStorage didn't.
> Even though 'Target System Timestamp Precision' property has a default value,
> if it's not included in getSupportedPropertyDescriptors method, the property
> value becomes null, instead of the default value. This combination is not
> handled well in AbstractListProcessor currently. That makes
> ListAzureBlobStorage behaves as if Azure Blob Storage time precision is in
> Minutes while it actually has Seconds precision. Incurs longer time for blob
> files to be picked than required.
> Not having 'Target System Timestamp Precision' at ListAzureBlobStorage seems
> reasonable as the processor interact with only Azure Blob Storage, and its
> timestamp precision should be fixed. AbstractListProcessor should provide an
> extension point for sub-classes to define default precision. In case for
> Azure Blob, it's SECONDS.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
