Adam,
Thanks for the quick response. I am having an issue getting this to work.
Option 1 is my preferred method as we don't want to have to pass certificates
bidirectionally for this to work but providing the cert from the receiving
instance of NiFi to the sending side is acceptable. I added the MergeContent
processor as you described into the flow. The properties I chose on this one
were Bin-Packing Algorithm for the Merge Strategy and FlowFile Stream, v3 for
the Merge Format. I left the other properties as their default values. Now, on
the receiving side, I added an UnpackContent processor into the flow and chose
flowfile-stream-v3 as the Packing Format and left the other properties at their
default values. The error I am receiving is
2023-02-09 13:44:48,317 ERROR [Timer-Driven Process Thread-10]
o.a.n.processors.standard.UnpackContent
UnpackContent[id=3661a39d-0186-1000-7de6-6a9f83b69400] Unable to unpack
StandardFlowFileRecord[uuid=8fd3961b-04b2-47d6-9678-d50d6c1ad1fc,claim=StandardContentClaim
[resourceClaim=StandardResourceClaim[id=1675868391223-1, container=default,
section=1], offset=208, length=29],offset=0,name=test9,size=29]; routing to
failureorg.apache.nifi.processor.exception.ProcessException: IOException thrown
from UnpackContent[id=3661a39d-0186-1000-7de6-6a9f83b69400]:
java.io.IOException: Not in FlowFile-v3 format at
org.apache.nifi.controller.repository.StandardProcessSession.write(StandardProcessSession.java:3148)
at
org.apache.nifi.processors.standard.UnpackContent$FlowFileStreamUnpacker.lambda$unpack$1(UnpackContent.java:533)
at
org.apache.nifi.controller.repository.StandardProcessSession.read(StandardProcessSession.java:2694)
at
org.apache.nifi.controller.repository.StandardProcessSession.read(StandardProcessSession.java:2662)
at
org.apache.nifi.processors.standard.UnpackContent$FlowFileStreamUnpacker.unpack(UnpackContent.java:527)
at
org.apache.nifi.processors.standard.UnpackContent.onTrigger(UnpackContent.java:294)
at
org.apache.nifi.processor.AbstractProcessor.onTrigger(AbstractProcessor.java:27)
at
org.apache.nifi.controller.StandardProcessorNode.onTrigger(StandardProcessorNode.java:1356)
at
org.apache.nifi.controller.tasks.ConnectableTask.invoke(ConnectableTask.java:246)
at
org.apache.nifi.controller.scheduling.TimerDrivenSchedulingAgent$1.run(TimerDrivenSchedulingAgent.java:102)
at org.apache.nifi.engine.FlowEngine$2.run(FlowEngine.java:110)
at java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:511)
at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.runAndReset(FutureTask.java:308) at
java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor$ScheduledFutureTask.access$301(ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.java:180)
at
java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor$ScheduledFutureTask.run(ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.java:294)
at
java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1149)
at
java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:624)
at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:750)Caused by: java.io.IOException:
Not in FlowFile-v3 format at
org.apache.nifi.util.FlowFileUnpackagerV3.unpackageFlowFile(FlowFileUnpackagerV3.java:59)
at
org.apache.nifi.processors.standard.UnpackContent$FlowFileStreamUnpacker.lambda$null$0(UnpackContent.java:535)
at
org.apache.nifi.controller.repository.StandardProcessSession.write(StandardProcessSession.java:3133)
... 17 common frames omitted
I double checked the properties on each of new processors I added in the flow
and they are exactly as described above. What am I doing wrong?
--Tom
On Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 04:11:25 PM EST, Adam Taft
<[email protected]> wrote:
Tom,
Acknowledged a bit of pain here. This was recently discussed in the Dev mailing
list about this functionality going away, and yes, it's definitely going away.
So you're aware, this deprecation will be locked in when NiFi 2.0 is released
(in the near future). That being said, there are a few solutions for you...
1. You can bundle up your flowfiles using the MergeContent processor. You will
generally want to choose the "FlowFile Stream v3" format. With this
configuration, MergeContent will grab a batch of flowfiles and serialize them
into a format that captures all of the flowfile attributes and payload. It's a
very simple protocol underneath the hood, basically just a binary concatenation
style of format. It does capture all of the attributes, which can then be
extracted on the receiving side.
On the receiving side, you will want to configure the UnpackContent processor,
again with the "FlowFile Stream v3" configuration. This will effectively unwind
the bundle and recreate all of your original flowfiles. Note that there are a
couple of attributes that will be completely lost in this process.
Specifically, the flowfile uuid will not be updated to the original value. So
if you need to maintain the original flowfile id, you will need to copy it
(using UpdateAttribute) before running through MergeContent on the sender.
You would use InvokeHTTP and ListenHTTP as your transport for this option. The
complete workflow would look something like:
[Sender] ... -> MergeContent -> InvokeHTTP (using POST) -> { ... } ->
[Receiver] ListenHTTP -> UnpackContent -> ...
2. You can also configure NiFi to talk to another NiFi using the "site to site"
capability. The setup for this is a bit more complicated and may not
necessarily work for your network topology. But it's there as an option and
used by many people successfully. And it's pretty cool, because it's configured
more like a processor group rather than a processor chain (as in #1 above).
Site-to-site supports both "raw" (raw socket) and "http" transport protocols.
There's plenty of good documentation about this, but here's the user manual
entry for it:
https://nifi.apache.org/docs/nifi-docs/html/user-guide.html#site-to-site
I think in general, the second approach (site-to-site) would be preferred. But
after experimenting with it or based on some characteristics of your network,
you might find favor with the first method. Additionally, the first approach is
probably closer to your existing dataflow configuration today, if you're just
simply trying to model the behavior you had with deprecated PostHTTP.
Hope this helps.
/Adam
On Wed, Feb 8, 2023 at 11:23 AM Tom Horvath via users <[email protected]>
wrote:
Hello,
I’d like to use the InvokeHTTP processor instead of the PostHTTP processor
because the PostHTTP processor is deprecated but I cannot figure out how to
configure it to send the flow file attributes along with the content similar to
how the PostHTTP processor does, when the send as flow file option is set to
true. I want to maintain the attributes across the sites. Can someone assist?
Regards,
Tom
