[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-3216?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15813613#comment-15813613
 ] 

Bryan Bende commented on NIFI-3216:
-----------------------------------

[~ijokarumawak] Great idea! That would be very helpful to identify why the 
expected number of signals wasn't reached. We would also need that optional 
property in the Wait processor so it knew which count to check, right? 

So in your example Wait would have something like "Signal Count" set to 1,000 
and "Signal Count Name" set to "success" (of course these could be expression 
language references too), then there would be one or more Notify processors 
with one of them also having "Signal Count Name" set to "success". 

The Wait processor also has a concept of expiring the wait based on the 
Expiration Duration in the processor, so maybe it can log all the counts when 
something is expired so that it is easy to see why it didn't get successfully 
released. 

> Add ability to wait for N signals to Wait/Notify processors
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: NIFI-3216
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-3216
>             Project: Apache NiFi
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>    Affects Versions: 1.2.0
>            Reporter: Bryan Bende
>
> The recently added Wait and Notify processors allow a flow file to be held at 
> the Wait processor until a signal is received in the Notify processor. It 
> would be nice to be able to wait for N signals before releasing.
> One way this could be done is to have a property like "Signal Count" on the 
> Wait processor, and then count the keys in the cache starting with some 
> pattern, and release when the # of keys equals the signal count.
> This would require the ability to get all the keys from the cache, or at 
> least get all keys matching a pattern: 
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-3214



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

Reply via email to