Russ, 
This sort of deviates from your original question, but Would applying a 
flowfile expiration time on the connection (during experimentation)  work with 
your flow?  This would keep the queue more manageable. 

> On Jan 10, 2017, at 4:35 PM, Russell Bateman <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> To update this thread, ...
> 
> 1. Setting up a no-op processor to "drain" the queue doesn't seem to present 
> any speed advantage over right-clicking the queue and choosing Empty queue.
> 2. Removing the flowfile and provenance repositories (cd flowfile_repository 
> ; rm -rf *) is instantaneous.
> 3. However, removing the content repository from the filesystem via console 
> isn't immediate. It does take time. It appears that it may not be taking as 
> long as either method in #1 above, but it does take a very long time. I had 
> over a hundred million files being emptied when I started this thread and I'm 
> still only down just under 40% left as I write this final volley 2 hours 
> after trying to delete them using the filesystem (CentOS 7, CPU inactive, 
> 128Gb memory, 56 cores, hard drive--not SSD).
> 4. I don't dare delete the database_repository.
> 5. I'm assuming that once all three repositories are gone, I'll be able to 
> restart NiFi without any damage to what I expect flowfile.xml.gz and the rest 
> of the conf/ subdirectory are safe-guarding for me.
> 
> There may not be any instantaneous solution anyone can offer short of 
> renaming the content repository subdirectory, setting up a background task to 
> smoke it, and creating a new content repository to start afresh with. I 
> haven't tried that yet.
> 
> It's likely a better idea to think ahead about this and provide for draining 
> the queues as the flowfiles reach them. If all you want is a count of 
> successful outcomes, you could do that with a no-op processor that counts as 
> it goes and puts the number somewhere for safe-keeping. I wouldn't be doing 
> this if I weren't trying to make some observations on performance, processing 
> loads, etc., in short, testing.
> 
> If I experience anything nasty or noteworthy from this point on [4,5], I'll 
> come back and update this thread again.
> 
> 
>> On 01/10/2017 02:50 PM, Russell Bateman wrote:
>> In my case, I'm experimenting with huge flows and huge numbers of files. I 
>> wasn't thinking about how much work I'd create for myself by storing up 
>> files in a queue at the end (or, in some cases, at intermediate points) when 
>> I might want to clean house and start over.
>> 
>> So, I can just bring NiFi down, smoke the repos, then restart safely?
>> 
>> 
>>> On 01/10/2017 02:39 PM, Joe Witt wrote:
>>> Millions or gajillions will indeed take a while as they have to swap in as 
>>> presently implemented.  We could certainly optimize that if is a common 
>>> need.
>>> 
>>> Blowing away the repos will certainly do the trick and be faster.  Though 
>>> is clearly a blunt instrument.
>>> 
>>> Do you think we need an express queue killer option?
>>> 
>>> On Jan 10, 2017 1:32 PM, "Russell Bateman" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> If I'm experimenting and have gajillions of flowfiles in a queue that takes 
>>> a very long time to empty from the UI, is there a quicker way? I can 
>>> certainly bounce NiFi, delete files, both, etc.
>>> 
>> 
> 

Reply via email to