bakaid commented on a change in pull request #683: MINIFICPP-1087 - Proper
handling of errors during onSchedule calls
URL: https://github.com/apache/nifi-minifi-cpp/pull/683#discussion_r351733869
##########
File path: libminifi/src/core/ProcessGroup.cpp
##########
@@ -136,13 +147,14 @@ void ProcessGroup::removeProcessGroup(ProcessGroup
*child) {
}
}
-void ProcessGroup::startProcessing(const
std::shared_ptr<TimerDrivenSchedulingAgent> timeScheduler, const
std::shared_ptr<EventDrivenSchedulingAgent> &eventScheduler,
- const
std::shared_ptr<CronDrivenSchedulingAgent> &cronScheduler) {
+void ProcessGroup::startProcessingProcessors(const
std::shared_ptr<TimerDrivenSchedulingAgent> timeScheduler,
+ const std::shared_ptr<EventDrivenSchedulingAgent> &eventScheduler, const
std::shared_ptr<CronDrivenSchedulingAgent> &cronScheduler) {
std::lock_guard<std::recursive_mutex> lock(mutex_);
- try {
- // Start all the processor node, input and output ports
- for (const auto &processor : processors_) {
+ std::set<std::shared_ptr<Processor> > failed_processors;
+
+ for (const auto &processor : failed_processors_) {
+ try {
Review comment:
If I understand correctly, this means that processors that can be
successfully scheduled will remain scheduled even if other processors fails to
schedule.
This will cause processors before the failed ones to fill the connections
until backpressure stops them, and processors after the failed ones to starve.
I am not saying this is a bad thing, I am asking if this is the behaviour we
want/NiFi follows.
----------------------------------------------------------------
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
