Member since
07-30-2019
3406
Posts
1622
Kudos Received
1008
Solutions
My Accepted Solutions
| Title | Views | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| 110 | 12-17-2025 05:55 AM | |
| 171 | 12-15-2025 01:29 PM | |
| 115 | 12-15-2025 06:50 AM | |
| 243 | 12-05-2025 08:25 AM | |
| 405 | 12-03-2025 10:21 AM |
07-16-2018
02:12 PM
@Raymond Honderdors - The reason SAM and Schema Registry were removed when installing a HDP + HDF cluster has to do with dependency issues. It comes down to issues in Ambari 2.6.x version that come in to play when both HDP and HDF mpack are both installed that affects those services. - Those issues have been addressed in Ambari 2.7.0. Since both HDP 3.0 and HDF 3.2 (not yet released) support Ambari 2.7.0, full support of SAM and Schema Registry will return with those versions loaded together. - HDF 3.2 is baselined off Apache NIFi 1.7 (so it will include everything in apache Nifi 1.7 plus some additional HDF specific changes and some additional fixes/enhancements) - Thank you, Matt - If you found this Answer addressed your original question, please take a moment to login and click "Accept" below the answer.
... View more
07-13-2018
03:59 PM
@Prachi Sharma A standalone NiFi uses the configured nifi.state.management.provider.local for everything while in a clustered environment state can be stored in either the configured nifi.state.management.provider.local or nifi.state.management.provider.cluster. - I see no reason why you cannot just define a different state-provider for nifi.state.management.provider.local that uses ZK instead of local disk. This configuration change would be made in the state-management.xml file and nifi.properties file. - For a standalone NiFi, you could simply configure the nifi.state.management.provider.local= property in the nifi.properties file to point at the existing "zk-provider" in the state-management.xml file. You then want to edit the zk-provider in the state-management.xml file with the required ZK properties. - I recommend testing this out. In theory it should work perfectly, but i have not set this up myself. - Thanks, Matt - When an "Answer" addresses/solves your question, please select "Accept" beneath that answer. This encourages user participation in this forum.
... View more
07-13-2018
03:44 PM
@Harish Vaibhav Kali Yes, unless you are using ldap and can setup a ldap sync to add the users for you.
... View more
07-13-2018
01:49 PM
2 Kudos
@Harish Vaibhav Kali - With the release of Apache NiFi 1.0 there were major design changes to NiFi at its core. Most obvious major changes include: 1. Gone is the NiFi Cluster Manger in favor of a new zero master clustering for example. 2. Additionally NiFi's authorization model moved to a very granular authorization setup and also added multi-tenancy capability (Multiple users can be logged in at the same time making changes concurrently to different components). - With this major re-work to user authentication/authorization the ability to request access was left out. Because of the new very granular authorization capability the notion of user requesting access became very convoluted. Suppose a user does have access to the /flow NiFi resource. This does not mean they have the ability to actually build, view, or modify any of the actual components on the canvas. And there is not capability for that user (who ha authorized access to the UI) to request additional accesses. So it felt just like an incomplete solution just to give only user who could not access UI ability to request access. - Not to say that such a capability may not come back in the future, i just believe it is a low priority type item. - As of Apache NiFi 1.5, Nifi provides the ability within the authorizers.xml to sync NiFi's list of users/groups with LDAP. This will auto populate users in the NiFi users UI to which an admin user can then apply various authorizations. - Thank you, Matt - When an "Answer" addresses/solves your question, please select "Accept" beneath that answer. This encourages user participation in this forum.
... View more
07-13-2018
01:23 PM
@Nikhil What I was getting at was that the authentication methods are different here. - I am assuming your users who access the NIFi UI via the load balancer are using a user/password authentication method? That method results in a token being issued to the authenticated user which is then passed by the client in every subsequent request to the NiFi API. - With Site-To-Site, there are no tokens involved in the authentication process since certificate authentication occurs via two-way TLS in every single rest api call. - Admittedly, I know nothing about your specific LB or how it is configured, so these are just suggested things to consider. - Also want to let you know you must be running an older HDF version. Newer versions support editing the URL string without needing to recreate the RPG. - Thank you, Matt
... View more
07-13-2018
12:59 PM
Conceptually the flow might look something like this: Thank you, Matt - When an "Answer" addresses/solves your question, please select "Accept" beneath that answer. This encourages user participation in this forum.
... View more
07-13-2018
12:49 PM
1 Kudo
@rajat puchnanda - NiFi is generally designed for independent FlowFile operation. A NiFi processor component is designed to execute against a FlowFile with no regard to other FlowFiles in the flow or coming in to the flow. - NiFi did however introduce some processors that can help achieve the logic you are looking for with some limitations. Those processors in NiFi that will allow such logic in a dataflow design would be the Wait and Notify processors. - The wait processors is designed to allow FlowFiles to pass only when a release signal is matched. The Notify processor is responsible for setting that release signal. - Question 1: You stated that you have multiple CSV files and each of those CSV files contains "date_column". Is that a single line per each incoming CSV file? or is each file a multi-line CSV file where there is a date that needs to validated in the date_column of each line? - Question 2: Are you try to fail the just a single file if any one line in it fails to validate against the date_column or are you trying to fail every file if the date column fails to validate in any one of the files? - Question 3: Do you know how many files are going to be processed? Even with Wait and Notify processors, you need to be able to tell the NiFi dataflow in this case how many files are expected; otherwise, the flow would have no way of knowing if it is complete and can release the files downstream. - The solution here may be multipart, but it all starts with knowing exactly how many files you are dealing with. Depending on the answers to above questions, you may be able to accomplish this using the below link as a reference only: https://gist.github.com/ijokarumawak/375915c45071c7cbfddd34d5032c8e90 *** This covers incoming CSV where each CSV contains only a single date_column field that needs to be validated. You must know number of incoming FlowFiles in your batch. - or you mat find yourself needing to employ the concepts covered in below link in conjunction with above link: http://ijokarumawak.github.io/nifi/2017/02/02/nifi-notify-batch/ *** This scenario covers a two phase wait and notify to handle a scenario where each CSV has multiple lines each with a dat_column to be validated. While it talks about two phase splitting, instead phase one would be based on first link above and second wait/notify loop would be based on splitting each CSV into individual FlowFiles per line to be evaluated. - Thank you, Matt
... View more
07-12-2018
12:46 PM
@Nikhil - *** Forum tip: Please try to avoid responding to an Answer by starting a new answer. Instead use the "add comment" tp respond to en existing answer. There is no guaranteed order to different answers which can make following a response thread difficult especially when multiple people are trying to assist you. - You get a verbose output form your keystore using the keytool command - keytool -v -list -keystore <keystore.jks file> - Look to see if your PrivateKeyEntry has any "ExtendedKeyUsages" listed. It would look something like this: #3: ObjectId: 2.5.29.37 Criticality=false
ExtendedKeyUsages [
clientAuth
serverAuth
] - Since you commented that the RPG works correctly when you use the URLs for the nodes directly, the certificates must support clientAuth then. This sounds more like a LB configuration issue. The certificate is being sent to the LB, but the LB is not forwarding that client cert on to the target end-point. - It is also not clear to me why you would configure your RPG to point at your LB instead of at one or more of the NiFi nodes directly? ----- The RPG will retrieve details about the entire target NiFi cluster when it connects and store/update that locally. So there really is no need for a LB in front of the RPG. - Thank you, Matt
... View more
07-11-2018
07:02 PM
@David Miller A Jira was raised to address that concern and the improvement was made in Apache NiFi 1.7.0: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-5208
... View more
07-11-2018
05:34 PM
@Rakesh S - NiFi is very capable of hitting those numbers.... But it is impossible for anyone to say base on the little information provided. NiFi requires very little resources to run. It is the dataflows/use cases which users design and how they implement those in NiFi that impact load on the available resources of the server. - So while those throughput numbers may be possible in one users dataflow implementation, they may not be for another user. The best option is to perform so load testing in your Final NiFi design to see how it performs and what resources it ends up consuming. Then tweak your dataflows design implementation to achieve better throughput. - Thanks, Matt
... View more