Hello, 1) I am not sure there is a definitive plan for removing variables yet, but it is definitely something to consider for a NiFi 2.0 (or other future release). I would also say that templates are in the same situation.
Templates were created as a way for someone to share a part of a flow with someone else, not really as a deployment mechanism. We have now centered around the "flow definition" JSON used by NiFi Registry as the format that should be used for importing/exporting/deploying. You can right-click on a PG and Download Flow Definition, or create a new PG and upload the flow definition JSON, or save/import to/from a NiFi Registry. If you use this format, it does in fact capture the parameter contexts and their initial values, minus sensitive values, and it will create the contexts on import to a new NiFi instance. 2) This has come up a few times... it was an intentional decision to not allow a sub-PG to inherit the param context from a parent PG, as it becomes complicated to understand what value is actually going to be resolved. However, I do think we need a user-friendly way to allow setting the context on all sub-PGs. So if you were to configure a top-level process group and set the param context, you would have an option to select that all sub-PGs are also set to this. It is unclear if/when this would be implemented, as someone would have to take on the work to implement it. Thanks, Bryan On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 11:05 AM Fredrick Pletz II <fredpl...@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote: > > Good morning, > I love the introduction of parameters. They satisfy a longstanding need for > managing multiple sensitive values from a single spot. However, the > implementation does not satisfy the same functionality as variables. Based > on the comment inside NiFi stating that parameters are replacing variables, > this has me worried that I'm going to lose significant functionality if > variables stop being supported. Specifically, I use variables to assign > non-sensitive values throughout a NiFi in a way that can be transferred via > templates. This allows me to create a generic template, deploy that > template, and configure the specifics by just setting a few variables. It > has sped up deployment immensely. Parameters don't transfer with templates, > and have to be added to every processing group. I don't know of a way to > have all processing groups set to a parameter context all at once, so I would > end up needing to create the parameter context, add all the values, then add > that parameter context to dozens of processing groups. This would be a major > step backward in streamlining deployments. > Question 1) is NiFi planning to abandon support for variables? > Question 2) is there a way to address the issues I have with parameter > contexts? - inability to assign a parameter context to ALL processing > groups, or even all sub-processing groups under a selected processing group > - inability to transfer parameter context to new NiFi instances > Fred Pletz
