Re: SplitRecord vs SplitText: fragment attributes

[James Wing <jv...@gmail.com>]

Uwe,

Please do create a JIRA.  I agree with you that SplitRecord should provide
compatible fragment.* attributes like the older split processors.
Partially for a consistent user experience, and partly for compatibility
with MergeContent and other processors that read the fragment.* attributes.

Thanks,

James

On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 7:17 AM, Uwe Geercken <uw...@web.de> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I have used both the SplitRecord and SplitText processors. When using the
> SplitText processor, the flowfile gets various attributes for the fragment
> which in turn can be used to generate a unique filename for the output with
> e.g. PutFile. I was using the fragment.index attribute for this.
>
> The SplitRecord does not create attributes for the fragments. The only
> attribute I can use to generate a unique filename would be the uuid of the
> flowfile. While this is ok for me, I would recommend that the SplitRecord
> would generate similar attributes for the fragments as the SplitText
> processor. And btw: the other SplitXXX processors also have attributes for
> the fragments.
>
> Should I open a jira on this?
>
> Rgds,
>
> Uwe
>