You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@nifi.apache.org by Mike Thomsen <mi...@gmail.com> on 2018/09/25 18:14:23 UTC
Any down sides to putting a controller service in the same package as
a processor?
I picked up NIFI-5224, which is for creating a Solr client service, and was
wondering if there are any gotchas or down sides to putting the controller
service in the same NAR as the processors that will use it. Is there any
reason I would want to avoid that?
Thanks,
Mike
Re: Any down sides to putting a controller service in the same
package as a processor?
Posted by Mike Thomsen <mi...@gmail.com>.
Mark,
Yeah, it already exists, but it is only used by the Mongo lookup service.
Not going to push that change because it would invalidate the service
completely, but I think it would be low impact for Mongo users.
Mike
On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 3:35 PM Mark Payne <ma...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Mike,
>
> The Mongo Controller Service already exists though, right? You cannot move
> it into the Processors NAR
> after it's already been released. That would change the 'bundle
> coordinates' for the controller service and
> would mean that any flow that uses it is no longer valid and would have to
> be reconfigured.
>
> Thanks
> -Mark
>
>
> > On Sep 25, 2018, at 3:09 PM, Mike Thomsen <mi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Thanks. That's what I thought. I may also do that for the Mongo package
> > because it should cut some space by not duplicating the Mongo driver.
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 2:46 PM Bryan Bende <bb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> That is fine for the CS implementation, the CS API should be in it's own
> >> NAR.
> >> On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 2:14 PM Mike Thomsen <mi...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I picked up NIFI-5224, which is for creating a Solr client service, and
> >> was
> >>> wondering if there are any gotchas or down sides to putting the
> >> controller
> >>> service in the same NAR as the processors that will use it. Is there
> any
> >>> reason I would want to avoid that?
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>>
> >>> Mike
> >>
>
>
Re: Any down sides to putting a controller service in the same
package as a processor?
Posted by Mark Payne <ma...@hotmail.com>.
Mike,
The Mongo Controller Service already exists though, right? You cannot move it into the Processors NAR
after it's already been released. That would change the 'bundle coordinates' for the controller service and
would mean that any flow that uses it is no longer valid and would have to be reconfigured.
Thanks
-Mark
> On Sep 25, 2018, at 3:09 PM, Mike Thomsen <mi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Thanks. That's what I thought. I may also do that for the Mongo package
> because it should cut some space by not duplicating the Mongo driver.
>
> On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 2:46 PM Bryan Bende <bb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> That is fine for the CS implementation, the CS API should be in it's own
>> NAR.
>> On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 2:14 PM Mike Thomsen <mi...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I picked up NIFI-5224, which is for creating a Solr client service, and
>> was
>>> wondering if there are any gotchas or down sides to putting the
>> controller
>>> service in the same NAR as the processors that will use it. Is there any
>>> reason I would want to avoid that?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Mike
>>
Re: Any down sides to putting a controller service in the same
package as a processor?
Posted by Mike Thomsen <mi...@gmail.com>.
Thanks. That's what I thought. I may also do that for the Mongo package
because it should cut some space by not duplicating the Mongo driver.
On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 2:46 PM Bryan Bende <bb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> That is fine for the CS implementation, the CS API should be in it's own
> NAR.
> On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 2:14 PM Mike Thomsen <mi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > I picked up NIFI-5224, which is for creating a Solr client service, and
> was
> > wondering if there are any gotchas or down sides to putting the
> controller
> > service in the same NAR as the processors that will use it. Is there any
> > reason I would want to avoid that?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Mike
>
Re: Any down sides to putting a controller service in the same
package as a processor?
Posted by Bryan Bende <bb...@gmail.com>.
That is fine for the CS implementation, the CS API should be in it's own NAR.
On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 2:14 PM Mike Thomsen <mi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I picked up NIFI-5224, which is for creating a Solr client service, and was
> wondering if there are any gotchas or down sides to putting the controller
> service in the same NAR as the processors that will use it. Is there any
> reason I would want to avoid that?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mike