Hi Mark,

Yeah, I think that's what I have now.  The issue being that I could end up
with a duplicate of a file.

I guess I could use the DetectDuplicate processor to make sure that I
de-dupe the Flowfiles before I increment the counter.  The issue here is
that I want the latest available FlowFile to replace one if it exists
(users could update a file's contents before a batch is complete).

Given there are 5 'types', is there a processor that allows me to match a
'type' attribute against a dictionary?

On Wed, 16 Aug 2017 at 15:07 Mark Payne <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi Andy and welcome to the community!
>
> I think that what you're doing here seems very reasonable. If you want to
> wait for 5 'like flowfiles' instead of
> just 5 flowfiles, you should be able to use the "Signal Counter Name" of
> the Wait processor. For example,
> if your UpdateAttribute processor creates a 'type' and a 'batch'
> attribute, you can set the Wait processor's
> Signal Counter Name to "${type}" or to "${type}${batch}", depending on how
> you want to group them together.
> This will wait until you reach 5 flowfiles with the same "type" attribute
> (or combination of "type" and "batch" attributes),
> according to what you set as the Signal Counter Name.
>
> Does this make sense?
>
> Thanks
> -Mark
>
> > On Aug 16, 2017, at 9:55 AM, Andy Loughran <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Hey everyone,
> >
> > This is my first post.
> >
> > I'm building out a pipeline with Nifi, but am stuck on an architectural
> decision around some fairly basic design.  I think I'm stuck as I'm
> operating on the wrong paradigm, but the application receiving my flow is
> the limitation in this context.
> >
> > I'm using ListS3 to poll for csv files.  There need to be 5 different
> types of file uploaded with a unique batch identifier for them to be
> released.  I'm using UpdateAttribute to rip the type and batch from the
> filename, then using wait to hold the batch.
> >
> > At the moment though, I'm holding until a batch has 5 files, rather than
> 5 files with each attribute type matching the expected types.
> >
> > Is this the wrong way to be thinking about this problem, or does this
> sound like a good use case for Nifi - but using a better combination of
> processors.  If anyone could give me guidance or point me toward an example
> template for batch process I'd be grateful.
> >
> > Look forward to helping out in the community where I can.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Andy
>
>

Reply via email to