Hi Russell,

Thanks for your question.

Yes, working with Controller Services has definitely changed in 1.x compared to 
0.x NiFi.  Matt Gilman wrote a nice article about how Controller Service 
scoping was updated in 1.x with the introduction of Multi-Tenant Authorization 
and also discusses the recent improvements made in NiFi 1.2 to alleviate some 
of the user confusion around scoping [1].   If you would like to see further 
details, the parent Jira for the improvements can be found here [2].

I think there is opportunity to improve the Apache documentation we have around 
this functionality, so I just filed a new Jira [3].

Let us know if you have any more questions.

Thanks,

Drew

[1] 
https://community.hortonworks.com/articles/90259/understanding-controller-service-availability-in-a.html
[2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-3128
[3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-3911



> On May 16, 2017, at 11:28 AM, Russell Bateman <r...@windofkeltia.com> wrote:
> 
> It appears to me that that, unlike what happened in NiFi 0.x, in 1.x when I 
> look at controller services via the General menu -> Controller Services, what 
> I see is totally different from what I see when I configure controller 
> services for a processor.
> 
> If I use the General menu to set up my controller services, I do not see nor 
> am I given the option of using them in particular for processors I'm 
> configuring. Instead, I appear to get a "Process Group Configuration and a 
> list of controller services which are not the ones I'm looking for (because 
> when I set them up, I gave them "special" names or renamed names I could 
> recognize apart from any other use).
> 
> Note: I'm more of a processor and controller service author than an 
> experienced user of NiFi, so I may just be hopelessly confused.
> 
> My question is what's the point of being able to configure controller 
> services "globally" or "generally" if you can't reach them when you need them?
> 
> Please confirm that I'm not just smoking funny weed and that this is 
> different, in fact, from how it worked in 0.7.1.
> 
> Thanks.

Reply via email to