From dev-return-18697-archive-asf-public=cust-asf.ponee.io@nifi.apache.org Tue Jan 29 20:34:11 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by mx-eu-01.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id A3F2C180625 for ; Tue, 29 Jan 2019 20:34:10 +0100 (CET) Received: (qmail 45439 invoked by uid 500); 29 Jan 2019 19:34:09 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@nifi.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@nifi.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@nifi.apache.org Delivered-To: moderator for dev@nifi.apache.org Received: (qmail 2376 invoked by uid 99); 29 Jan 2019 19:13:39 -0000 X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd1-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.971 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.971 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.972] autolearn=disabled Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2019 12:13:35 -0700 (MST) From: Sumanth To: dev@nifi.apache.org Message-ID: <1548789215807-0.post@n7.nabble.com> In-Reply-To: <1217956179.5384158.1546477466435@mail.yahoo.com> References: <1217956179.5384158.1546477466435@mail.yahoo.com> Subject: Re: Proposing NiFi-Fn MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sam, great proposal. I am thinking in terms of network communication between processors/functions. came across http://rsocket.io/ which might be ideal inter-process communication protocol for NiFi-fn this can provide back pressure over network. looking forward feedback on any alternatives that can provide back pressure over network. -- Sent from: http://apache-nifi-developer-list.39713.n7.nabble.com/