[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-4774?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16332522#comment-16332522
]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on NIFI-4774:
--------------------------------------
Github user devriesb commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/2416
while i in no way object to a new implementation, I'm not sure that is the
correct solution to the bug described in NIFI-4774[1]. A new implementation
would need to be tested to a degree that a tweak to the existing implementation
would not, and fixing this bug in a timely fashion would seem to be a worthy
goal.
[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-4774
> FlowFile Repository should write updates to the same FlowFile to the same
> partition
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: NIFI-4774
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-4774
> Project: Apache NiFi
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Core Framework
> Reporter: Mark Payne
> Assignee: Mark Payne
> Priority: Major
>
> As-is, in the case of power loss or Operating System crash, we could have an
> update that is lost, and then an update for the same FlowFile that is not
> lost, because the updates for a given FlowFile can span partitions. If an
> update were written to Partition 1 and then to Partition 2 and Partition 2 is
> flushed to disk by the Operating System and then the Operating System crashes
> or power is lost before Partition 1 is flushed to disk, we could lose the
> update to Partition 1.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
