Skip to content

NIFI-10966: Add option to QuerySalesforceObject to run custom query#6794

Closed
Lehel44 wants to merge 6 commits intoapache:mainfrom
Lehel44:NIFI-10966
Closed

NIFI-10966: Add option to QuerySalesforceObject to run custom query#6794
Lehel44 wants to merge 6 commits intoapache:mainfrom
Lehel44:NIFI-10966

Conversation

@Lehel44
Copy link
Contributor

@Lehel44 Lehel44 commented Dec 18, 2022

Summary

NIFI-10966

  • Query Type property added: Query Parameters (original behavior), Custom Query
  • Since we cannot define a schema for custom objects and inferring can be slow, in case of Custom Query mode record processing is not supported

Tracking

Please complete the following tracking steps prior to pull request creation.

Issue Tracking

Pull Request Tracking

  • Pull Request title starts with Apache NiFi Jira issue number, such as NIFI-00000
  • Pull Request commit message starts with Apache NiFi Jira issue number, as such NIFI-00000

Pull Request Formatting

  • Pull Request based on current revision of the main branch
  • Pull Request refers to a feature branch with one commit containing changes

Verification

Please indicate the verification steps performed prior to pull request creation.

Build

  • Build completed using mvn clean install -P contrib-check
    • JDK 8
    • JDK 11
    • JDK 17

Licensing

  • New dependencies are compatible with the Apache License 2.0 according to the License Policy
  • New dependencies are documented in applicable LICENSE and NOTICE files

Documentation

  • Documentation formatting appears as expected in rendered files

@pvillard31
Copy link
Contributor

Hi - I've been playing with this and it works as expected (except that SOQL is super hard to understand...). One improvement I'd like to see is that the processor should accept input relationships (optional - a bit like ExecuteSQL) and the custom SOQL query should be able to reference flow file attributes. This would give me the option to potentially chain multiple instances together in a flow definition.

@pvillard31
Copy link
Contributor

I've been playing with the latest version and this is working as expected. I'm a +1 from a feature usage point of view.

@tpalfy
Copy link
Contributor

tpalfy commented Feb 24, 2023

LGTM
Thank you for your work @Lehel44 and your review @pvillard31 !
Merged into main.

asfgit pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 8, 2023
This closes #6794.

Signed-off-by: Tamas Palfy <tpalfy@apache.org>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants