Yes, it makes sense. But it shouldn't be too short as well. For example I easily have RouteOnAttribute relationships with 1000+ characters. (currently around 4000 is the longest).
Raymond Op do 1 aug. 2019 om 17:05 schreef Joe Witt <joe.w...@gmail.com>: > Peter, > > It certainly makes sense to prevent authorized users from doing obviously > unreasonable things in places where such filters could be applied. This is > a good example of such a thing. > > Thanks > > On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 10:52 AM Peter Wicks (pwicks) <pwi...@micron.com> > wrote: > > > I noticed yesterday that automatic ellipsis was not working for > > relationship names in the Connection Creation window (PR submitted in > > NIFI-6512). As part of my test I started playing around with submitting > > fairly long names for relationships in RouteOnAttribute. This all worked > > with out issue on relationships with greater than 1000 characters. > > > > This led me to wonder how other parts of NiFi deal with very long strings > > in the UI, such as the breadcrumb trail. > > > > To bring an already long story to a close, I submitted a 200MB string as > a > > Process Group name using Chrome’s developer tools to do a custom PUT. > NiFi > > happily accepted the 104857600 character long name! Of course, this means > > each call to load that process group fails spectacularly in Chrome with > the > > whole UI thread dead, but otherwise NiFi just keeps running. > > > > This is what led me to wonder if maybe we should have some constraints on > > the maximum size of these UI visible strings. > > > > Thanks, > > Peter > > >
