Hi,
HandleHttpResponse is designed to be used in conjunction with
HandleHttpRequest. Based on the description,
it seems like InvokeHTTP’s Response connection has been connected to
HandleHttpResponse, which is not needed
because the output FlowFile on the Response connection already contains the
Hi Sagar,
Can you share more about how your flow is setup?
It sounds like the flow is maybe attempting to send a response to the same
message multiple times,
or the request is timing out while the data is flowing through NiFi.
Thanks
-Mark
> On Aug 10, 2023, at 3:18 PM, Sagar Reddy Poreddy
Dear NiFi Team,
Hope you are doing well, I would like report and issue that I am facing
with NiFi HandleHttpResponse. I have an SAP API, I am consuming it via
invokeHttp and connected the response to HandleHttpResponse. When I call
the api for the first time it is giving the correct response (via
Thanks @YolandaMDavis.
Yes. It's fine to apply.
Sarah Olson
m: 415-298-5573
Sent from my iPhone
> On May 3, 2017, at 6:07 AM, YolandaMDavis wrote:
>
> Github user YolandaMDavis commented on the issue:
>
>https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1736
>
>@thesolson
Github user JPercivall commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/563
This currently has conflicts with master and needs to be rebased before it
can be merged (sorry for taking so long to review the PR).
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this
Github user alopresto commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/611
This was merged to `0.x`. I will open a new PR with the changes for
`master`.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If
Github user JPercivall commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/563
@ijokarumawak I believe you're right about it only being Kafka. I looked
through them as well and couldn't find an instance of external state.
While surprised I am definitely happy because
Github user JPercivall commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/612
+1
Reviewed code, did a contrib check build, created a cluster to demonstrated
the problem and then recreated with the fix and the issue was resolved. Thanks
Mark will merge it in to 0.x
Github user mcgilman commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/611
Thanks @alopresto! The changes look good. I have verified the changes
locally in a secured cluster.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on
Github user moranr commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/604
â**NIFI-2031** looks good
For **NIFI-2036,** NiFi logo seems to sit a little low after the other
toolbar changes. Please *change* `margin:0 20px 0 15px;` *to* `margin:0 20px
3px 15px;`
Github user mcgilman commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/610
Looks good @markap14! This has been merged to master.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have
Github user mcgilman commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/611
Reviewing...
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if
Github user mcgilman commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/610
Reviewing...
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if
Github user jfrazee commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/591
Closing this and resubmitting against master since 0.7 is frozen.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does
Github user JPercivall commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/576
+1
Did a contrib check build, reviewed the code and comments were addressed,
and did a functional test using vanilla ES as well as one secured with Shield.
Thanks for the contribution
Github user olegz commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/578
+1
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is
Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/483
Gents,
any further comments? Keen to revisit code if necessary
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project
Github user mcgilman commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/594
Thanks @scottyaslan! This has been merged to master.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this
Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/475
Noticed that Apache Zeppelin also use similar profiles:
https://github.com/apache/zeppelin/blob/e0f77d68e813c61d083988e3e167693016418bda/spark-dependencies/pom.xml#L709
---
If your project
Github user pvillard31 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/502
Hey @mans2singh, I'm really busy this week and I won't be able to have a
look before next week :(
In the meantime, you can fix the conflicts against master. And maybe @apiri
will have a chance
Github user ijokarumawak commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/563
@JPercivall Thanks for your time to review.
I've looked at every existing Processors, Reporting tasks, and Controller
services, but couldn't find other component needing external state
Github user mans2singh commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/502
Hey @pvillard31 @aldrin - Just wanted to check if you have any
suggestions/recommendations for this pull request.
Thanks
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and
Github user jeffoxenberg commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/602
Is the test suite actually creating a cassandra instance, creating a table,
and executing the generated cql against it? I did some testing and was able to
get the original code to insert by
Github user mattyb149 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/602
Can you put your template in a Gist? I'll give it a try too
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not
Github user mattyb149 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/602
Were there quotes (single or double) in the real flow's value?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does
Github user mattyb149 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/602
I cherry-picked in the commits that added unit tests, to show that they
would fail without your fix, however they pass. Any idea how the tests differ
from the error that spawned the Jira?
---
If
Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/483
I also added Apache Commons Email to NOTICE
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/483
@joewitt According to to
https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/org.subethamail/subethasmtp/3.1.7
The only dependencies should be
Github user mattyb149 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/602
An example could be another test just like that one with cql.args.10.value
set to "I'm not a timestamp" or a timestamp not in ISO-8601 format like
"07.01.2016". Not saying the operation should
Github user jeffoxenberg commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/602
No problem. I think I added a test for a good value here:
`https://github.com/jeffoxenberg/nifi/commit/335e4f08a60989909d2d152f426fa5d46dec9a1b`.
Could you give me an example of writing
Github user markap14 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/603
@mcgilman excellent - all looks good, as far as I can tell. This PR
addresses several issues that existed in the application. I've pushed to master.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can
Github user mattyb149 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/602
Looks good, mind adding unit test(s) to try various good and bad values?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your
Github user markap14 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/593
@mcgilman good call. Looks good to me!
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
Github user mcgilman commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/593
@markap14 Looks great! I made one additional change to populate snippet
results off of the actual components instead of just the snippet contents
(since the contents are now pruned).
Github user JPercivall commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/576
It would be nice to have integration tests similar to those in the original
Fetch/PutElasticSearch processors.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply
Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/483
@ijokarumawak thanks for the gist.
Interesting that junit missed that and I incorrectly assumed the change in
structure had not lead to side effects. Feedback was much appreciated and
unless
Github user ijokarumawak commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/483
@trixpan Thanks for addressing comments promptly! I confirmed that all of
my comments are addressed. However the modification on ExtractEmailHeader.java
didn't work with following error:
Github user mattyb149 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/595
This PR appears to be a collection of merge commits, were you trying to
issue a PR with new code against the master branch? If so can you point me at
the commit, I can help get the PR into the
Github user mcgilman commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/589
@jtstorck looks good. However, I noticed that the revision version was
being necessarily checked. Those are already verified in the Tenant and
AccessPolicy resource. Also, I updated the error message
Github user mcgilman commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/590
Reviewing...
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if
Github user mcgilman commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/588
Reviewing...
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if
Github user mcgilman commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/577
Thanks @scottyaslan! This has been merged into master.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have
Github user pvillard31 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/502
Hi @mans2singh, I didn't find time to give it a new try, but I hope I will
this week.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as
Github user YolandaMDavis commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/564
@davetorok here is the first phase of custom transform support (supporting
the transform interface)
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear
Github user mattyb149 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/500
Also it looks like like you've got a merge commit in your chain here. Can
you start with a fresh master branch, apply your patch, then push the pull
request? If you have two commits, perhaps you
Github user mattyb149 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/500
The file "NIFI-1922-patch" is included in this commit and should not be,
just the changes it implies (which have been applied). Can you remove this file
from the commit? Please and thanks!
---
If
Github user mans2singh commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/502
Hi @pvillard31 @apiri - Just wanted to see if you have any
thoughts/recommendations for me.
Also, @pvillard31 were you able to run the integration tests and validate
that the entries were
Github user mcgilman commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/582
I've merged this to master. Looks good @jtstorck!
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this
Github user joewitt commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/584
Hello
Is this PR associated with an Apache NiFi JIRA? If not can you please
create one. Also, we'll want to update the commit message to reference that
JIRA as well. You can see some of
Github user joewitt commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/483
@trixpan i haven't been able to dive into the details of the pr to have
more comments just yet. Hopefully others can engage as well.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email
Github user trixpan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/483
ListenSMTP has been added to package. PR now includes the full suite:
* ListenSMTP (self explanatory)
* ExtractEmailHeaders (convert an eml into attributes)
* ExtractEmailAttachments
Github user jvwing commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/583
Here's what the result looks like while the details section is expanded. I
plead guilty to being a bad UI designer, any tips would be appreciated.
Github user mcgilman commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/581
Reviewing...
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if
Github user bbende commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/579
+1 verified build passes contrib-check and was able to get into a secured
NiFi instance
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well.
Github user bbende commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/579
Reviewing...
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the
Github user jvwing commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/362
@miquillo I'm happy to review and test the contributions you have made, and
I would be happy to put some code where my comments with an implementation of
the signature version controls. But I am
Github user mcgilman commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/577
Reviewing...
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if
Github user brosander commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/525
@JPercivall just pushed change to update duplicate logging in the same way
as
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/548/files#diff-a88d41c9ef1b881c177706d4cc4b0bf1R294
---
If your project is set up
Github user JPercivall commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/573
+1
Fixes errors seen on Windows, code looks good and passes contrib-check.
Thanks Mark
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on
Github user bbende commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/567
+1 looks good, verified full build passes with contrib-check and the new
integration test pass, ran the app a bit and verified basic functionality
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply
Github user markap14 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/572
@mcgilman the PR has been updated to incorporate the feedback you provided.
Thanks!
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If
Github user mcgilman commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/566
Reviewing...
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if
Github user bbende commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/567
Will start reviewing...
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so,
Github user ijokarumawak commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/563
Integration test with Kerberized Kafka and Zookeeper haven't finished yet,
but the implementation is done. Would you please initiate the code review
process?
This PR added External State
Github user YolandaMDavis commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/564
Just to add I'm thinking of incorporating ContextualTransform support once
Variable Registry is incorporated to provide the transformation access to
system/env properties, flow file attributes,
Github user apiri commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/561
@jvwing Thanks for scoping it out and apologies on the prior false start.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project
Github user jvwing commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/561
The update looks good to me. I was able to install, start, stop, reboot,
etc. No test or contrib-check issues. I will squash and merge shortly.
Thanks @apiri for the script and
Github user apiri commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/561
Made those fixes and pushed them in a separate commit. Thanks for catching!
Verified this script as committed in a Docker container as opposed to my
prior Frankenscript and it seems to behave
Github user apiri commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/561
@jvwing Drat. I left off the semicolons. I was doing some adjustments in
one of my VM instances and must not have propagated back to my core checkout.
Will update that concerning the || conditionals.
Github user YolandaMDavis commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/553
@jvwing @apiri closing out this PR, @apiri has a version coming.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project
Github user apiri commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/553
Looks like the current commit will currently disregard nifi-env.sh after
being installed. Consider the case where I install the service and then later
switch JRE (perhaps between Oracle and Open JDK).
Github user jvwing commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/553
Thanks for the update, @YolandaMDavis. I tested this on Amazon Linux, and
it worked well. Service installed, started, restarted after a reboot, stopped,
etc. I was worried that the magic chkconfig
Github user JPercivall commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/556
Ah sorry @jskora for misinterpreting it, changes look good. I am gonna do
another round of testing and then should be good to merge.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this
Github user joewitt commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/556
@JPercivall I do agree with @jskora interpretation fwiw.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have
Github user jskora commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/556
I took @joewitt's comment to mean keeping the combined bundle and
documenting that attributes are not stable and could change with version
upgrades, which will apply to both bundles if we break them
Github user mattyb149 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/558
+1 LGTM, tested with plenty of provenance events, verified the "Skipping
search" entry appeared in the log.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply
Github user JPercivall commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/556
@jskora what about changing it so there is a media and image bundles?
Reading this comment[1] it's what we decided and the only way not to break
backwards compatibility.
[1]
Github user jskora commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/556
Just pushed final cleanup, that should be it.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
Github user JPercivall commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/556
According to the latest comment from @bbende, yes
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this
Github user JPercivall commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/556
The only relevant exception I saw processing the download folder was an xml
parse error related to a underlying limitation of Tika, no need to address:
2016-06-22 11:32:19,774 ERROR
Github user joewitt commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/556
nice work on wrapping this stuff up @jskora and @JPercivall !
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not
Github user jskora commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/556
To wrap this up, should I add the failure provenance now or will that be a
future change?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as
Github user mattyb149 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/550
+1 LGTM, reproduced the error then applied the patch and retested, verified
that a connection cannot be moved if its destination has active threads (even
if stopped).
---
If your project is set up
Github user markap14 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/556
@JPercivall @joewitt I believe what you said to be accurate. The JIRA that
I was referencing is https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-104 - I do
believe it is very advantageous to be able to
Github user joewitt commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/556
@JPercivall @markap14 here is my two cents in reading this exchange. Joe's
points are really good about what a user expects and would like to see. Mark's
points are true but from a purely how it is
Github user markap14 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/556
@JPercivall the reason is not to keep data in the flow. The reason is
because users often configure the dataflow in that way, and NiFi should handle
that case well. We do have some JIRAs to make
Github user JPercivall commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/556
@markap14 it seems odd to limit the usefulness of provenance for the reason
to "keep data in the flow". Information is being created on "why this flowfile
failed" but we don't track it in
Github user markap14 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/556
@JPercivall we don't typically recommend emitting ROUTE events when routing
to failure. Often times, failure is routed back to self, if for no other reason
than to keep the data in the flow. We don't
Github user markap14 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/477
@mattyb149 Looks good for the most part. I left a few inline comments, just
some tweaks that i think can probably help to cleanup the code. Also, I noticed
OrcFlowFileWriter.java is a pretty hefty
Github user JPercivall commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/556
I am trying to parse my downloads folder again and I came across a couple
exceptions (will post in other comment) but as I try to figure why it happened
I realize that since ExtractMediaMetatadata
Github user jskora commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/556
@JPercivall and @joewitt, I just pushed the updates. Have at it!
* Code review cleanup.
- Replace deprecated ProcessorLog with ComponentLog and deprecated
ObjectHolder with
Github user jskora commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/556
I'm running contrib check and a functional test now.
Should be pushed shortly.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well.
Github user jskora commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/280
Yes, this should be closed. Done.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and
Github user mcgilman commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/559
Thanks @scottyaslan!
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so,
Github user scottyaslan commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/559
looks good
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or
Github user alopresto commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/554
I'm going to rebase, squash, and re-push.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
Github user alopresto commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/554
I fixed an issue in `GetSNMPTest` (a local variable was referenced from
within an inner class, and wasn't declared `final`). I forgot to squash it with
the commit that closed the PR. It was commit
Github user alopresto commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/554
I am getting test failures:
```
Results :
Failed tests:
KafkaPublisherTest.validateSuccessfulSendAsDelimited:106 expected:<3> but
was:<-1>
Github user jskora commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/556
I'm not sure why but only the main code commit,
236266c9e4ed89b4c78438f36408b5f6e0b0c488, applies to 1.0/master without
problems. The other pom commits do not.
It is easy enough to fix them.
Github user pvillard31 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/379
Thanks for the review @apiri!
I still need to take into account some of your comments but I rebased the
PR against master. While doing some additional testing, for a reason I can't
explain yet,
1 - 100 of 430 matches
Mail list logo