..just to follow up @Andre - your solution worked for me - thankyou. Mike
On 6 May 2017 at 11:22, Mike Harding <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks for all the suggestions. Regards using Groovy I did try and use it > to solve my problem but just couldn't get it to work correctly. I tried to > implement something similar to the following solution given here ( > http://stackoverflow.com/questions/24827855/groovy- > httpbuilder-issues-with-cookies) to address a cookie authentication issue > but the cookie didn't seem to attach/work with follow-on requests and still > gave me 401 but I managed to get something working in python hence why I > was trying to use that. > > I'm wondering whether I should just use ExecuteProcess/ExecuteStreamCommand > as a quick fix? > > Mike > > On 6 May 2017 at 09:29, Giovanni Lanzani <[email protected] > > wrote: > >> Please do not remove the Python scripting facilities. >> >> I believe most people experience it as very slow because (ok, Python is >> slow) they only get a flow file at a time. >> >> I think Matt pointed out in this ML once that you can use >> >> flowfiles = session.get(1000) >> for flowfile in filter(None, flowfiles): >> # do things >> >> In that case Jython will be kept alive much longer. Or am I missing >> something? >> >> Giovanni >> >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: Joe Witt [mailto:[email protected]] >> > Sent: Saturday, May 6, 2017 1:12 AM >> > To: [email protected] >> > Subject: Re: Is it possible to reference python requests module in >> > ExecuteScript? >> > >> > It is worth discussing whether there is sufficient value to warrant >> keeping >> > jython/python support in the processors or whether we should pull it. >> It is >> > certainly something we can document as being highly limited but we don't >> > really know how limited. Frankly given the performance I've seen with >> it I'd be >> > ok removing it entirely. One is better off calling the script via a >> system call. >> > Groovy is one that I've seen perform very well and be fully featured. >> > >> > On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 6:38 PM, Russell Bateman <[email protected]> >> > wrote: >> > > We really want to use ExecuteScript because our end users are >> Pythonistas. >> > > They tend to punctuate their flows with the equivalent of PutFile and >> > > GetFile with Python scripts doing stuff on flowfiles that pass out of >> > > NiFi before returning into NiFi. >> > > >> > > However, we find it nearly impossible to replace even the tamest of >> > > undertakings. If there were a good set of NiFi/Python shims that, from >> > > PyCharm, etc., gave us the ability to prototype, test and debug before >> > > copying and pasting into ExecuteScript, that would be wonderful. It >> > > hasn't worked out that way. Most of our experience is copying, pasting >> > > into the processor property, only to find something wrong, sometimes >> > > syntax, sometimes something runtime. >> > > >> > > On their behalf, I played with this processor a few hours a while >> back. >> > > Another colleague too. Googling this underused tool hasn't been >> > > helpful, so the overall experience is negative so far. I can get most >> > > of the examples out there to work, but as soon as I try to do "real" >> > > work from my point of view, my plans sort of cave in. >> > > >> > > Likely the Groovy and/or Ruby options are better? But, we're not >> > > Groovy or Ruby guys here. I understand the problems with this tool and >> > > so I understand what the obstacles are to it growing stronger. The >> > > problems won't yield to a few hours one Saturday afternoon. Better >> > > problem-logging underneath and >> > > better- and more lenient Python support on top. The second one is >> > > tough, though. >> > > >> > > My approach is to minimize those black holes these guys put into their >> > > flows by creating custom processors for what I can't solve using >> > > standard processors. >> > > >> > > Trying not to be too negative here... >> > > >> > > >> > > On 05/05/2017 04:09 PM, Andre wrote: >> > > >> > > Mike, >> > > >> > > I believe it is possible to use requests under jython, however the >> > > process isn't very intuitive. >> > > >> > > I know one folk that if I recall correctly has used it. Happy to try >> > > to find out how it is done. >> > > >> > > Cheers >> > > >> > > On Sat, May 6, 2017 at 4:57 AM, Mike Harding <[email protected]> >> > wrote: >> > >> >> > >> Hi All, I'm now looking at using ExecuteScript and python engine to >> > >> execute HTTP requests using the requests module. I've tried >> > >> referencing requests the module but when I try to import requests I >> > >> get a module reference error. >> > >> I downloaded the module from here > >> > >> https://pypi.python.org/pypi/requests >> > >> Not sure why it isnt picking it up. Ive tried referencing the >> > >> directory and the .py directly with no success. >> > >> Any ideas where im going wrong? >> > >> Cheers, >> > >> Mike >> > >
