Peter Probably best to go ahead and file a JIRA. In it you can reliably post the attachments. There was a potentially related timezone handling issue as I recall in this past release so perhaps there is some relationship.
Thanks Joe On Sun, May 28, 2017 at 10:04 PM, Peter Wicks (pwicks) <pwi...@micron.com> wrote: > I wanted to re-open this discussion, it's been a while and I'm still seeing > the issue even with the latest version. I'm still seeing this issue running > a stock NiFi v1.2.0. By stock I mean no custom NAR’s, etc… just original > vanilla code, in this case with no configuration, so running unsecured, > empty canvas (except for my test case). > > > > I’ve expanded my test scenarios. > > > > Scenario 1 is Windows 7, code built using mvn, using Oracle Java. > > Java Version: > > java version "1.8.0_91" > > Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.8.0_91-b15) > > Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM (build 25.91-b15, mixed mode) > > > > Scenario 2 is RHEL 7.3, the NiFi build is v1.2.0 downloaded from the NiFi > website. Running OpenJDK. > > > > openjdk version "1.8.0_102" > > OpenJDK Runtime Environment (build 1.8.0_102-b14) > > OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM (build 25.102-b14, mixed mode) > > > > I’ve attempted to attach a screenshot (my attachments seem to not make it > very often on this list). In it I show the onscreen Tasks/Time for two > processors: one shows 1 / 00:30:04.292 and the other 0 / 00:30:00.000. > > > > Thanks! > > Peter > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Joseph Niemiec [mailto:josephx...@gmail.com] > > Sent: Friday, March 31, 2017 10:54 PM > To: dev@nifi.apache.org > Subject: Re: NiFi Processors show 30 Second Execution time, 0 executions > > > > What version of Java are you running on ? Major_minor? > > > > On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 10:49 AM, Peter Wicks (pwicks) <pwi...@micron.com> > > wrote: > > > >> I misread my own screenshot, it says 30 minutes, not seconds. Also, I > >> did a restart of NiFi and opened it up in a fresh instance of Chrome; > >> no change. I kicked off a GenerateFlowFile processor and the > >> milliseconds are going up, but the 30 minutes is remaining the same... > >> > >> > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Joseph Niemiec [mailto:josephx...@gmail.com] > >> Sent: Friday, March 31, 2017 10:41 PM > >> To: dev@nifi.apache.org > >> Subject: Re: NiFi Processors show 30 Second Execution time, 0 > >> executions > >> > >> Doing a clean build of 091359b450a7d0fb6bb04e2238c9171728cd2720, I > >> will have to see if I have a windows 7 VM anywhere, I know Witt was > >> using Win10 and didnt see it... I find it odd that ALL your processors > >> have a 30 second number not just the UpdateAttribute. Anything else > >> about your environment you can share that may be unique? > >> > >> On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 10:15 AM, Peter Wicks (pwicks) > >> <pwi...@micron.com> > >> wrote: > >> > >> > 091359b450a7d0fb6bb04e2238c9171728cd2720, so just one commit behind > >> > master. > >> > I am testing on Windows 7. > >> > > >> > Lee, yield isn't a bad idea, but UpdateAttribute in my screenshot > >> > has never run; not even once. I don't think it's had the opportunity > >> > to > >> yield. > >> > > >> > -----Original Message----- > >> > From: Joseph Niemiec [mailto:josephx...@gmail.com] > >> > Sent: Friday, March 31, 2017 9:37 PM > >> > To: dev@nifi.apache.org > >> > Subject: Re: NiFi Processors show 30 Second Execution time, 0 > >> > executions > >> > > >> > I just built the latest and am unable to see the issue as well. I > >> > also played with yield duration with no luck. > >> > > >> > Can you provide us what build your on so I can check that one out > >> exactly? > >> > I did my last trunk test as of - > >> > 6a64b3cd9cca70e6a27b9034eba520ae0c0cb6ca > >> > > >> > git rev-parse HEAD > >> > > >> > > >> > On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 9:21 AM, Lee Laim <lee.l...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > > >> > > Is it potentially related to yield duration? > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > On Mar 31, 2017, at 6:58 AM, Peter Wicks (pwicks) > >> > > > <pwi...@micron.com> > >> > > wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > channel. > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > -- > >> > Joseph > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Joseph > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Joseph
