You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.

Posted to issues@nifi.apache.org by markap14 <gi...@git.apache.org> on 2017/04/12 19:14:42 UTC

[GitHub] nifi pull request #1668: NIFI-3658: Created processor for converting records...

GitHub user markap14 opened a pull request:

    https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1668

    NIFI-3658: Created processor for converting records between data form\u2026

    \u2026ats with like schemas
    
    Thank you for submitting a contribution to Apache NiFi.
    
    In order to streamline the review of the contribution we ask you
    to ensure the following steps have been taken:
    
    ### For all changes:
    - [ ] Is there a JIRA ticket associated with this PR? Is it referenced 
         in the commit message?
    
    - [ ] Does your PR title start with NIFI-XXXX where XXXX is the JIRA number you are trying to resolve? Pay particular attention to the hyphen "-" character.
    
    - [ ] Has your PR been rebased against the latest commit within the target branch (typically master)?
    
    - [ ] Is your initial contribution a single, squashed commit?
    
    ### For code changes:
    - [ ] Have you ensured that the full suite of tests is executed via mvn -Pcontrib-check clean install at the root nifi folder?
    - [ ] Have you written or updated unit tests to verify your changes?
    - [ ] If adding new dependencies to the code, are these dependencies licensed in a way that is compatible for inclusion under [ASF 2.0](http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-a)? 
    - [ ] If applicable, have you updated the LICENSE file, including the main LICENSE file under nifi-assembly?
    - [ ] If applicable, have you updated the NOTICE file, including the main NOTICE file found under nifi-assembly?
    - [ ] If adding new Properties, have you added .displayName in addition to .name (programmatic access) for each of the new properties?
    
    ### For documentation related changes:
    - [ ] Have you ensured that format looks appropriate for the output in which it is rendered?
    
    ### Note:
    Please ensure that once the PR is submitted, you check travis-ci for build issues and submit an update to your PR as soon as possible.


You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:

    $ git pull https://github.com/markap14/nifi NIFI-3658

Alternatively you can review and apply these changes as the patch at:

    https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1668.patch

To close this pull request, make a commit to your master/trunk branch
with (at least) the following in the commit message:

    This closes #1668
    
----
commit db99c3fb038cc70e1a681825effe7b0b8f35fb4d
Author: Mark Payne <ma...@hotmail.com>
Date:   2017-04-12T18:14:02Z

    NIFI-3658: Created processor for converting records between data formats with like schemas

----


---
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 enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastructure@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] nifi issue #1668: NIFI-3658: Created processor for converting records betwee...

Posted by markap14 <gi...@git.apache.org>.

Github user markap14 commented on the issue:

    https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1668
  
    @mattyb149 I've pushed another commit that should address the property names.


---
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 enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastructure@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] nifi pull request #1668: NIFI-3658: Created processor for converting records...

Posted by markap14 <gi...@git.apache.org>.

Github user markap14 commented on a diff in the pull request:

    https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1668#discussion_r112284424
  
    --- Diff: nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-standard-bundle/nifi-standard-processors/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/standard/ConvertRecord.java ---
    @@ -0,0 +1,158 @@
    +/*
    + * Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one or more
    + * contributor license agreements.  See the NOTICE file distributed with
    + * this work for additional information regarding copyright ownership.
    + * The ASF licenses this file to You under the Apache License, Version 2.0
    + * (the "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance with
    + * the License.  You may obtain a copy of the License at
    + *
    + *     http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
    + *
    + * Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
    + * distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
    + * WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
    + * See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
    + * limitations under the License.
    + */
    +
    +package org.apache.nifi.processors.standard;
    +
    +import java.io.IOException;
    +import java.io.InputStream;
    +import java.io.OutputStream;
    +import java.util.ArrayList;
    +import java.util.HashMap;
    +import java.util.HashSet;
    +import java.util.List;
    +import java.util.Map;
    +import java.util.Set;
    +import java.util.concurrent.atomic.AtomicReference;
    +
    +import org.apache.nifi.annotation.behavior.EventDriven;
    +import org.apache.nifi.annotation.behavior.InputRequirement;
    +import org.apache.nifi.annotation.behavior.InputRequirement.Requirement;
    +import org.apache.nifi.annotation.behavior.SideEffectFree;
    +import org.apache.nifi.annotation.behavior.SupportsBatching;
    +import org.apache.nifi.annotation.behavior.WritesAttribute;
    +import org.apache.nifi.annotation.behavior.WritesAttributes;
    +import org.apache.nifi.annotation.documentation.CapabilityDescription;
    +import org.apache.nifi.annotation.documentation.Tags;
    +import org.apache.nifi.components.PropertyDescriptor;
    +import org.apache.nifi.flowfile.FlowFile;
    +import org.apache.nifi.flowfile.attributes.CoreAttributes;
    +import org.apache.nifi.processor.AbstractProcessor;
    +import org.apache.nifi.processor.ProcessContext;
    +import org.apache.nifi.processor.ProcessSession;
    +import org.apache.nifi.processor.Relationship;
    +import org.apache.nifi.processor.exception.ProcessException;
    +import org.apache.nifi.processor.io.StreamCallback;
    +import org.apache.nifi.serialization.MalformedRecordException;
    +import org.apache.nifi.serialization.RecordReader;
    +import org.apache.nifi.serialization.RecordSetWriter;
    +import org.apache.nifi.serialization.RecordSetWriterFactory;
    +import org.apache.nifi.serialization.RowRecordReaderFactory;
    +import org.apache.nifi.serialization.WriteResult;
    +
    +@EventDriven
    +@SupportsBatching
    +@InputRequirement(Requirement.INPUT_REQUIRED)
    +@SideEffectFree
    +@Tags({"convert", "generic", "schema", "json", "csv", "avro", "log", "logs", "freeform", "text"})
    +@WritesAttributes({
    +    @WritesAttribute(attribute = "mime.type", description = "Sets the mime.type attribute to the MIME Type specified by the Record Writer"),
    +    @WritesAttribute(attribute = "record.count", description = "The number of records in the FlowFile")
    +})
    +@CapabilityDescription("Converts records from one data format to another using configured Record Reader and Record Write Controller Services. "
    +    + "The Reader and Writer must be configured with \"matching\" schemas. By this, we mean the schemas must have the same field names. The types of the fields "
    +    + "do not have to be the same if a field value can be coerced from one format to another. For instance, if the input schema has a field named \"balance\" of type double, "
    +    + "the output schema can have a field named \"balance\" with a type of string, double, or float. If any field is present in the input that is not present in the output, "
    +    + "the field will be left out of the output. If any field is specified in the output schema but is not present in the input data/schema, then the field will not be "
    +    + "present in the output.")
    +public class ConvertRecord extends AbstractProcessor {
    +
    +    static final PropertyDescriptor RECORD_READER = new PropertyDescriptor.Builder()
    +        .name("Record Reader")
    +        .description("Specifies the Controller Service to use for reading incoming data")
    +        .identifiesControllerService(RowRecordReaderFactory.class)
    +        .required(true)
    +        .build();
    +    static final PropertyDescriptor RECORD_WRITER = new PropertyDescriptor.Builder()
    +        .name("Record Writer")
    +        .description("Specifies the Controller Service to use for writing out the records")
    +        .identifiesControllerService(RecordSetWriterFactory.class)
    +        .required(true)
    +        .build();
    +
    +    static final Relationship REL_SUCCESS = new Relationship.Builder()
    +        .name("success")
    +        .description("FlowFiles that are successfully transformed will be routed to this relationship")
    +        .build();
    +    static final Relationship REL_FAILURE = new Relationship.Builder()
    +        .name("failure")
    +        .description("If a FlowFile cannot be transformed from the configured input format to the configured output format, "
    +            + "the unchanged FlowFile will be routed to this relationship")
    +        .build();
    +
    +    @Override
    +    protected List<PropertyDescriptor> getSupportedPropertyDescriptors() {
    +        final List<PropertyDescriptor> properties = new ArrayList<>();
    --- End diff --
    
    They could, but both approaches are common within the NiFi codebase. Given the overhead that is required to generate a new list every time, and the relatively low frequency with which this is called, I think the argument of performance is a moot point. So it comes down to readability. I find this approach *far* more readable than static member variables and static blocks that clutter up the code. This approach also has the advantage of consistency, as many components cannot use static references because they dynamically generate the properties. So I will always side on generating the list inline over static member variables.


---
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 enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastructure@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---