[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-3716?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16004640#comment-16004640
 ] 

ASF GitHub Bot commented on NIFI-3716:
--------------------------------------

Github user josephxsxn commented on the issue:

    https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1747
  
    I think you just need a entry in your pom in the toolkit-assembly now and 
ull be all done :D 
    
    Looks like it works well. Will test on some other clusters just to validate 
diversity.
    
    ```
    $ sh flow-analyzer.sh 
/data/ssd01/builds/nifi-rc-120/nifi-1.2.0/conf/flow.xml.gz
    Using flowfile=/data/ssd01/builds/nifi-rc-120/nifi-1.2.0/conf/flow.xml.gz
    Total Bytes Utilized by System=11 GB
    Max Back Pressure Size=2 GB
    Min Back Pressure Size=1 GB
    Average Back Pressure Size=1.222222222 GB
    Max Flowfile Queue Size=2147483647
    Min Flowfile Queue Size=10000
    Avg Flowfile Queue Size=477230810.444444444
    ```


> Utility to calculate MAX storage required for BackPressure on a Node
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: NIFI-3716
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-3716
>             Project: Apache NiFi
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>            Reporter: Joseph Niemiec
>            Assignee: Eric Ulicny
>            Priority: Trivial
>
> Today there is no way to understand the max amount of data which can be 
> stored in backpressure for a given flow. Personally have had users configure 
> queues with impossible backpressure amounts that would definitely fill the 
> disk, having an operational tool to understand if anyone has done something 
> so dramatic would be helpful. 
> I see this produce a report by analyzing the FlowFile.xml.gz.
> * Total Storage for all queues Backpressure 
> * Average Storage of all queues  Backpressure
> * Min and Max of all queues  Backpressure over the entire flow. 



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)

Reply via email to