Re: Custom Processor

[Gunjan Dave]

Hi Oleg,
Executesql is not the problem, but I am trying to achive something
different here. Exevutesql was just an example.

Based on following article,
https://dzone.com/articles/apache-nifi-not-from-scratch

i was trying to export classes of my existing application onto nifi custom
processor. Some classes have multiple database calls and i was thinking of
how I can do it. Those classes also have mq connection, so extending only
executesql will not help me.

is there some other way I can use consumejms or publishjms and nifi
sqlprocessors in my custom processor?

I understand that I can create these functionalities by using process
groups and specific processors on nifi ui, but was just being adventurous
on using NiFi differently by creating business specific custom processor

Anyone who has tried such a thing in past and give me some reference?

THANKS
Gunjan

On Thu, Sep 15, 2016, 10:56 PM Gunjan Dave <gunjanpiyushd...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi Nifi Team,
> I want to create a custom processor in which I want to use the database
> functionality.
> Such as, i want to extract some information from database as part of
> processor. I could Access the database controller service but how do I
> reuse executesql processor in my custom processor?
>

Custom Processor

[Gunjan Dave]

Hi Nifi Team,
I want to create a custom processor in which I want to use the database
functionality.
Such as, i want to extract some information from database as part of
processor. I could Access the database controller service but how do I
reuse executesql processor in my custom processor?

Re: Custom expression language functions

[Gunjan Dave]

Hi Joe,
Having the ability to extend or customize EL functions is important. Infact
few important functions like ability to fetch from distributed cache or
readily using Certain java claases like java.lang.*, Java.io.*,
java.match.* etc are missing.

adding processor is certainly feasible but its an extra hop. With the
ability to write global functions it can be achived in single processor
instead of two.

this would prove most useful in advanced rules tab of updateattribute
processor.



On Sun, Sep 11, 2016, 12:07 PM Gunjan Dave <gunjanpiyushd...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi Team, is there a way I can create custom functions which can then be
> referred in expression language and also be reusable.
>
> Thanks
> GUNJAN
>

Custom expression language functions

[Gunjan Dave]

Hi Team, is there a way I can create custom functions which can then be
referred in expression language and also be reusable.

Thanks
GUNJAN

Minifi question

[Gunjan Dave]

Hello everyone, minifi as i understand has specific use case of small
footprint data collection agent.
Hiwever, today i was trying it out and saw an interesting possibility,
would need NiFi teams opinion on it.

Can minifi be also modified to work as test harness agent? Like can
currrently processes a smaller part of the complete data flow. So with
certain enhacements as separate project, can it be also made to work as
test harness? I have further thoughts on it to share if you guys concur
with current thought

Re: Request for enhancement

[Gunjan Dave]

Hi Joe, I dont seem to have access to nifi jira to create one. Can it be
given? Or if not, could someone help raising it.

On Tue, Aug 30, 2016, 7:49 AM Joe Percivall <joeperciv...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> - Moving users list to BCC
>
> Hello Gunjan,
>
> This seems like a good potential idea. The proper place to submit the
> suggestion is through the Apache NiFi Jira[1]. It can more easily be
> discussed and worked on there.
>
> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI
>
>
> Suggestions/ideas from users are always welcome!
>
> Joe
> - - - - - -
> Joseph Percivall
> linkedin.com/in/Percivall
> e: joeperciv...@yahoo.com
>
>
>
> On Tuesday, August 30, 2016 12:06 PM, Gunjan Dave <
> gunjanpiyushd...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> Seems like below didnot get delivered.
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 29, 2016, 12:30 PM Gunjan Dave <gunjanpiyushd...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Team,
> > I would like to propose if the following enhacement if seen feasible can
> > be incorporated in the provenance graph.
> >
> > Current graph only shows the type, rather i would like to suggest if we
> > can actually put in the component name along with processor type. That
> > would make the graph more unique to each flow and more visually
> intuitive.
> >
> > just a suggestion, not mandatory.
> >
>