ijokarumawak commented on issue #3351: NIFI-2933 Remote input/output ports at any PG URL: https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/3351#issuecomment-477960874 Hi @ekovacs Here are the answers for your questions: > 1. any port dragged onto the root canvas is public by default. I only have the ability to select the type of the port if i am already in a PG. This is by design. Having local port in the root PG doesn't make sense because no connection can be made from/to such local port since there won't be a parent PG of the root PG. > 2. if i create a simple, 2 part flow like this: > "Cannot move Ports from the Root Group to a Non-Root Group". > do we want to keep these limitations? Good catch, thanks. I will consider removing this limitation. > 3. I create a PG, and in that PG i created a public port. Modified a.) part of the flow.: Disabled This is expected. Adding new connection to RemoteProcessGroup while it is transmitting, doesn't start transmission for the newly connected remote port. Each port connection has its own transmission status. You can see it by right clicking the RPG and select 'Manage remote ports' and start transmitting individually from there. > 4. After 3., i deleted the connection with the queued flowfiles. RPG still shows "XYZ -> 2". yet it transmits only to one public port (one that is in the child PG) This is expected. The '2' representing the number of available ports. Not necessary mean actively transmitting. In your case there are two possible ports (in the root and in the child PG).
---------------------------------------------------------------- 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. For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected] With regards, Apache Git Services
