Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Delivered-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Received: from cust-asf.ponee.io (cust-asf.ponee.io [163.172.22.183]) by cust-asf2.ponee.io (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49703200CE6 for ; Fri, 15 Sep 2017 11:35:06 +0200 (CEST) Received: by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) id 483611609D1; Fri, 15 Sep 2017 09:35:06 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id BB11B1609CF for ; Fri, 15 Sep 2017 11:35:05 +0200 (CEST) Received: (qmail 13538 invoked by uid 500); 15 Sep 2017 09:35:04 -0000 Mailing-List: contact users-help@nifi.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: users@nifi.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list users@nifi.apache.org Received: (qmail 13528 invoked by uid 99); 15 Sep 2017 09:35:04 -0000 Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd2-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 15 Sep 2017 09:35:04 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd2-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd2-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id F3A1A1A6E5B for ; Fri, 15 Sep 2017 09:35:03 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd2-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.497 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.497 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=1.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=disabled Received: from mx1-lw-us.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd2-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.9]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VsalOU7fbrnF for ; Fri, 15 Sep 2017 09:35:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from luxonit.com (luxonit.com [85.214.16.147]) by mx1-lw-us.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-lw-us.apache.org) with ESMTPS id CE9CC5F6C8 for ; Fri, 15 Sep 2017 09:35:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.49.205.39] (x52716a27.dyn.telefonica.de [82.113.106.39]) by luxonit.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BD05E3DDE0006; Fri, 15 Sep 2017 11:34:55 +0200 (CEST) From: Arne Degenring Content-Type: text/plain; charset=gb2312 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2017 11:34:54 +0200 Subject: Input Allowed Processor with Primary Node Execution Message-Id: <83465394-637A-4673-8C42-C838E886FBEA@luxonit.com> To: users@nifi.apache.org X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (14G60) X-PPP-Message-ID: <20170915093455.10299.43268@h2427337.stratoserver.net> X-PPP-Vhost: luxonit.com archived-at: Fri, 15 Sep 2017 09:35:06 -0000 Hi, =20 I have a question about an INPUT_ALLOWED processor that we run in Execution M= ode PRIMARY_NODE in a cluster installation. =20 Should the processor be able to process input flow files that reside on a di= fferent cluster node? =20 We had the situation on our testing system that a few flow files seemed to b= e stuck in the input queue in front of such processor. It turned out that th= e Flow Files were ingested on a different node, and it seem they weren=A1=AF= t transferred to the primary node for processing.=20 =20 Thanks Arne=