Tim, What version of NiFi are you using? As of 1.1.0 , you can specify a Validation Query on the DBCPConnectionPool, this is used by DBCP to validate that a connection is "good" before offering it to the client. For idle/timed-out connections, the validation query should fail and DBCP should attempt to get a new connection.
For the additional configuration, if a property cannot be added via the JDBC URL, then it can be added as a user-defined property (as of NiFi 1.2.0 ), the code calls dataSource.addConnectionProperty() for each of the supplied key/value pairs. Please see the processor doc  for more details. Regards, Matt  https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-2381  https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-3426  https://nifi.apache.org/docs/nifi-docs/components/org.apache.nifi/nifi-dbcp-service-nar/1.5.0/org.apache.nifi.dbcp.DBCPConnectionPool/index.html On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 4:00 PM, Tim Zimmerman <iceman...@hotmail.com> wrote: > Without going into too much detail (unless it would be useful). I am facing > an issue where long standing connections are eventually failing when > SQLServer attempts to bulk insert a file from NAS (we are using > integratedSecurity and the SQLServer is configured with kerberos > authentication and delegation). The process does work but at some point the > bulk insert is denied access to the file and it appears to be an issue with > the kerberos ticket becoming stale. > > The solution seems to be to time out connections that have been idle for > some time and allow the pool to reduce to zero connections. This forces a > new connection and authorization when needed. The connection seems to work > for as long as needed and after it is idle for some time it is removed from > the pool. > > These additional configurations are available in the underlying > DBCPConnectionPool but are not exposed through the service configuration. Is > there a specific reason they have not been exposed? I have downloaded the > source and made the changes myself but before I go any further I would like > to make sure I am not being too clever for my own good. > > Also, if there is not a specific reason they have not been exposed, would > this be something that would be considered for a future release? > > > > -- > Sent from: http://apache-nifi-users-list.2361937.n4.nabble.com/