Thanks a lot for your help! I was missing the Id in components (and like
you said, no need to increment version). You've saved me a lot of time,
thanks again :)

Wishing you a pleasant day!

2016-10-18 12:36 GMT+02:00 Koji Kawamura <ijokaruma...@gmail.com>:

> Hello,
>
> I was able to start/stop processors using 1.0 API. I am not sure if the
> API has changed from 0.x but, it seems you don't have to increment the
> revision. I used the same revision that is returned by NiFi.
>
> Here is an example (it's Javascript):
> https://github.com/ijokarumawak/nifi-deploy-process-group/blob/master/
> deploy.js#L131
>
> Hope this helps,
> Koji
>
> On Oct 18, 2016 7:03 PM, "ruaraidh jay-chalmer" <
> ruaraidh....@holimetrix.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
> I have been working on a few python tools that use the NiFi Rest API to do
> a few checks and commands here and there. Since the goal is mainly
> monitoring, stopping a processor is a very useful tool. In the previous
> version of the API (~0.7) I managed this by creating a dictionary with
> purely the processor ID, and the new state (or other parameter I wished to
> update), and then I encoded it and made my put request to the right link.
>
> This approach seems to no longer function in v1.0. I have tried create a
> small python dictionary to PUT to the server, but I keep on getting more
> and more errors, culminating in:
>
> <Response [400]>
> The processor id (null) in the request body does not equal the processor
> id of the requested resource (d70f5d7d-0157-1000-ffff-ffff80a4d2d7).
>
> Here is what is contained in my request:
>
> update = \
>     {
>         "revision": {
>             "version": processor["revision"]["version"] + 1
>         },
>         "id": processor["id"],
>         "status": {
>             "aggregateSnapshot": {
>                 "runStatus": "Stopped",
>                 "id": processor["id"]
>             }
>         },
>         "component": {
>             "state": "STOPPED"
>         }
>     }
>
> I am pretty sure my PUT request is correct, and that the problem is coming 
> from lack or excess of data in my request.
>
> If anyone has managed to achieve starting/stopping processors with the new 
> API, I would be grateful for the help!
>
> Thanks a lot
>
>
>
>

Reply via email to