I think the idea would be to provide API support for the schema registry
where you could work with it as just versioned blobs, and then the level of
support on top of that ( to the ui etc ) would be dependent on
the implementation, with AVRO being the first concrete implementation.
You could
A while back, I suggested (there is a JIRA for it) something similar for
Grok patterns (being able to have a global CS managing the grok patterns
instead of relying on local files to be distributed on the NiFi nodes). Not
the same but wanted to mention it in case it would drive towards something
Well, not really. The Avro Schema Registry does perform validation of the Avro
Schema. Which is something that a 'generic blob store' type of mechanism would
not really provide. I think I recant my recommendation of making it more
generic. There are definitely benefits to it being more
Fair enough. I forgot that we had the advanced UI for the Jolt Spec. That would
definitely be beneficial.
On Nov 20, 2019, at 10:47 AM, Joe Witt
mailto:joe.w...@gmail.com>> wrote:
...specific or generic - tradeoffs. A specific service would allow Jolt Spec
editing to have context and
Does it means that AvroSchemaRegistry is "not a good idea actually" ?
I am pretty sure I misunderstood, because in this case there is a kind of
compilation on schema.
But you are right, the registry for JOLT specification is just a storage of
blob.
Le mer. 20 nov. 2019 à 16:36, Mark Payne a
...specific or generic - tradeoffs. A specific service would allow Jolt
Spec editing to have context and meaning. A generic service for just blobs
would not. I think our Jolt stuff has an advanced UI that makes writing
the specs a bit easier. If true a more specific service would make sense.
I would recommend that we also be careful about the naming here and tying this
to Jolt. Really, this is just a mechanism for externalizing a big blob of text
(or bytes). There are several other processors and controller services that do
this, such as scripted components, Hadoop related
For the PR...
If only I would have enough time for that ;)
Soon it will be end year holidays, may be...
Le mer. 20 nov. 2019 à 16:28, Joe Witt a écrit :
> Yeah filing a JIRA would be good. Contributing a PR for it would be even
> better. It should have no impact on the schema registry
Yes it would be a ControllerService as you described.
There is currently three implementation :
* AvroSchemaRegistry
* ConfluentSchemaRegistry
* HortonworksSchemaRegistry
It could be based on something like them.
May be I should send something on Jira or somewhere else to submit the idea
to
Hello
Is the idea to have a place to store Jolt specifications that you could
then access in various components?
If so a simple ControllerService such as 'JoltSpecControllerService' which
has a list of keys (names of specs) and values (the spec) would probably do
the trick.
Thanks
On Wed, Nov
I think that is a great idea, I’d suggest the same thing for protobuf specs
as well.
Even if the first step is the registry supporting raw bytes access and
support….
On November 20, 2019 at 09:28:23, Etienne Jouvin (lapinoujou...@gmail.com)
wrote:
Hello all.
For reader and writers, there
11 matches
Mail list logo
