lordgamez commented on a change in pull request #1178:
URL: https://github.com/apache/nifi-minifi-cpp/pull/1178#discussion_r719358796



##########
File path: extensions/azure/processors/PutAzureBlobStorage.cpp
##########
@@ -179,53 +232,43 @@ void PutAzureBlobStorage::onTrigger(const 
std::shared_ptr<core::ProcessContext>
     return;
   }
 
-  auto connection_string = getConnectionString(context, flow_file);
-  if (connection_string.empty()) {
-    logger_->log_error("Connection string is empty!");
-    session->transfer(flow_file, Failure);
-    return;
-  }
-
-  std::string container_name;
-  if (!context->getProperty(ContainerName, container_name, flow_file) || 
container_name.empty()) {
-    logger_->log_error("Container Name is invalid or empty!");
-    session->transfer(flow_file, Failure);
-    return;
-  }
-
-  std::string blob_name;
-  if (!context->getProperty(Blob, blob_name, flow_file) || blob_name.empty()) {
-    logger_->log_error("Blob name is invalid or empty!");
+  auto params = buildAzureBlobStorageParameters(context, flow_file);
+  if (!params) {
     session->transfer(flow_file, Failure);
     return;
   }
 
   std::optional<storage::UploadBlobResult> upload_result;
   {
     // TODO(lordgamez): This can be removed after maximum allowed threads are 
implemented. See https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MINIFICPP-1566
+    // When used in multithreaded environment make sure to use the 
azure_storage_mutex_ to lock the wrapper so the
+    // client is not reset with different configuration while another thread 
is using it.
     std::lock_guard<std::mutex> lock(azure_storage_mutex_);
-    createAzureStorageClient(connection_string, container_name);
     if (create_container_) {

Review comment:
       That's true, in theory anyone could call it, but we usually handle 
onSchedule to be only run once before onTrigger calls, and we do not handle the 
possible concurrency in any other processor either. Also as the feature which 
will remove the mutexes from onTriggers and instead will mark the processors if 
they can be run in parallel or not is already in progress so I would not add 
additional mutex usages to it.




-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@nifi.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org


Reply via email to