ASF GitHub Bot commented on NIFI-4826:

Github user pvillard31 commented on a diff in the pull request:

    --- Diff: 
    @@ -106,7 +106,8 @@
             attributes.put("azure.etag", entity.getEtag());
             attributes.put("azure.primaryUri", entity.getPrimaryUri());
             attributes.put("azure.secondaryUri", entity.getSecondaryUri());
    -        attributes.put("azure.blobname", entity.getName());
    +        attributes.put("azure.blobname", entity.getBlobName());
    +        attributes.put("filename", entity.getName());
    --- End diff --
    You're right. I actually completely missed the fact that this change is for 
a processor with no input relationship... Disregard my comment.

> ListAzureBlobStorage doesn't write azure.blobname properly
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>                 Key: NIFI-4826
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-4826
>             Project: Apache NiFi
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: Extensions
>    Affects Versions: 1.2.0, 1.3.0, 1.4.0, 1.5.0
>            Reporter: zenfenan
>            Priority: Minor
> ListAzureBlobStorage as of now takes the substring from the blob's primary 
> URI i.e. primaryUri.lastIndexOf('/') + 1 and writes that as azure.blobname. 
> For ex, if the blob is in the path 
> "mystorageaccountname.blob.core.windows.net/container-name/path/to/the/blob". 
> It will write azure.blobname as "blob". So if we have the blob located under 
> a multiple hierarchy directory structure such as the above one, it will be 
> troublesome in the downstream processors like FetchAzureBlobStorage which 
> expects the full blob name to be given i.e. "path/to/the/blob". Giving just 
> "blob" here will fail.
> A workaround that can be followed right now, is to use "ExecuteScript" and 
> get the substring from primary URI i.e. everything after the 
> "https://"+storageAccountName+"/"+containerName+"/";. A better approach would 
> be to make use of the CloudBlob.getName() API provided in Azure SDK. It 
> should be a minor change since we are already using this SDK and the said 
> class in our processor.

This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA

Reply via email to