Aldrin - that would be nice, but the second template / instance is effectively controlled by another team and isn't available to us on the first instance. Does that help the use case?
Yes, Joe, the UX gets tricky because I think what I'm suggesting is effectively a global port that any processor can connect to and/or read from (for lack of a better term, a "connection bus"). On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 8:31 AM, Aldrin Piri <[email protected]> wrote: > Drat, I knew I would trip up on that. Instance A is instant drop, Instance > B is allow through. > > On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 8:30 AM, Aldrin Piri <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Maybe not the cleanest implementation, but as a quick solution, how about > > a RouteOnAttribute with an expression language that checks for a > particular > > environment variable. This means you have one template but instance A > > results in Ingress B being instantly dropped but Instance A allows it to > > pass through. Environment variables could easily be set/adjusted as part > > of your continuous deployment > > > > Your template then is: > > Ingress A --| > > --> Normalize --> Magic > > Ingress B --| Route on Attr --| > > > > On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 8:21 AM, Joe Witt <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> What you asked for here (single action adding a template and it is > >> live and connected) is not currently a feature. We'll need to think > >> through that more but the 'concept' I described seems feasible > >> provided a lot of 'ifs'. Those IFs are: > >> - The template being added contains a single output port > >> - The template being added doesn't require any 'sensitive properties' > >> - The template being added is entirely valid when added > >> > >> I'm wondering if we're not to the root of the use case though > >> honestly. It is possible a different design would be more appropriate > >> than templates for this case. We'll need to talk more on this. Are > >> you able to be more concrete with your example? > >> > >> Thanks > >> Joe > >> > >> > >> On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 8:16 AM, Brian Ghigiarelli <[email protected] > > > >> wrote: > >> > Is it safe to say, then, that it's not an existing feature? I haven't > >> > tried yet, but was wondering if setting up a remote process group > >> pointing > >> > to localhost would do the trick. Drawback to that is having to reach > >> out > >> > to the network interface. > >> > > >> > On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 9:58 PM, Brian Ghigiarelli < > [email protected] > >> > > >> > wrote: > >> > > >> >> Yeah, I think that would do the trick! > >> >> > >> >> On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 7:21 PM, Joe Witt <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> >> > >> >>> Brian > >> >>> > >> >>> So adding a template to the flow is a single call and connecting its > >> >>> output > >> >>> is a second call. Are you simply looking for a single call that > >> would do > >> >>> both? > >> >>> > >> >>> Just want to make sure i follow the idea. > >> >>> > >> >>> One thing that might make sense is to allow a user to drag a > template > >> onto > >> >>> a target component which we would treat as signifying that this is > >> where > >> >>> the output of that group goes. This would be cool so long as there > >> is a > >> >>> single output port of the template being instantiated. > >> >>> > >> >>> Am i in the ballpark? > >> >>> On Jul 13, 2015 7:08 PM, "Brian Ghigiarelli" <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> >>> > >> >>> > Hi all, > >> >>> > > >> >>> > Is there a way in NiFi to connect two processors without manually > >> >>> drawing > >> >>> > the line between them (or calling the REST interface to create > that > >> >>> > connection) ? > >> >>> > > >> >>> > To better describe this particular use case, we have Template A as > >> our > >> >>> main > >> >>> > flow. We can deploy Template A onto our main Instance A, and > >> everything > >> >>> > looks great. > >> >>> > > >> >>> > Instance B uses the same template, but has an additional ingress > >> path, > >> >>> so > >> >>> > we have created a smaller Template B to pull in that data. We'd > like > >> >>> > Template B to drop-in to NiFi and automatically output to one of > the > >> >>> > processors in Template A without having to manually connect them > >> each > >> >>> time > >> >>> > in order to ease the burden of the deployment. > >> >>> > > >> >>> > From a flow layout, it looks like: > >> >>> > > >> >>> > *Instance A:* > >> >>> > Ingress A --> Normalize --> Magic > >> >>> > > >> >>> > *Instance B:* > >> >>> > Ingress A --| > >> >>> > --> Normalize --> Magic > >> >>> > Ingress B --| > >> >>> > > >> >>> > Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! > >> >>> > > >> >>> > -- > >> >>> > Brian Ghigiarelli > >> >>> > > >> >>> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> -- > >> >> Brian Ghigiarelli > >> >> 570-878-9139 > >> >> > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > -- > >> > Brian Ghigiarelli > >> > 570-878-9139 > >> > > > > >
