I need the shell script to pull the .dat file from source server to SFTP server.
Every time the job runs, shell script has to verify if the table already exists in sftp server and get all the files corresponding to that table with date greater than the existing file. (file comparison is required based on the date in the filename).
Example: Yesterday, job ran and file "table1_extract_20190101.dat" is extracted. And in source server, I have 2 files "table1_extract_20190102.dat", "table1_extract_20190103.dat". Then it has to get both the files and so on for each and every table.
Please suggest on how this could be implemented.
Thanks
Use Ab Initio SFTP To component.
Ideally, add it at the end of the graph that creates the files, so all handling is in one place. The SFTP To component(s) would run in a new phase after the files are written.
Or, create another Ab Initio graph that looks for filenames based on the filename specification used to generate the original filenames. One risk is being sure the files have been written completely, which is why it is ideal to do it in the original graph. You would need to schedule this graph to run after the first graph is complete. A good way to do that is with a plan. Another way using Control>Center is to schedule this job after the previous one completes by adding a job dependency.
Related
I need to move several hundred files from a Windows source folder to a destination folder together in one operation. The files are named sequentially (e.g. part-0001.csv, part-002.csv). It is not known what the final file in the sequence will be called. The files will arrive in the source folder over a number of weeks and it is not ascertainable when the final one will arrive. The users want to use a trigger file (i.e. the arrival of a spefic named file in the folder e.g. trigger.txt) to cause flow to start. My first two thoughts were using a first ListFile processor as an input to a second, or the input to an ExecuteProcess processor that would call a script to start the second one, however, neither of these processors accept an input, so I am a bit stumped as to how I might achieve this, or indeed if it is possible with NiFi. Has anyone encountered this use case, and if so how did you resolve it?
I am getting multiple files from List SFTP processor. However the requirement is to only process the latest file based on last modification time of file. I tried merging files via merge content processor , but the last modification time goes away. Current version of Nifi is 1.6, so record set writer can't be used. How can the solution for it be implemented.
You can use AttributesTo*Processor and create a new flow file from filename and file.lastModifiedTime attributes. Then you can merge content to get a single flow file with both filename and modifiedtime. You should be able to able to get the file from here.
Not sure if this is a suitable use case for MapReduce: Part of the OOZIE workflow I'm trying to implement is to download a series of files named with sequential numbers (e.g. 1 through 20). I wanted those files to be downloaded simultaneously (5 files at a time), so I created a python script that creates 5 text files as follows:
1.txt: 1,2,3,4
2.txt: 5,6,7,8
3.txt: 9,10,11,12
4.txt: 13,14,15,16
5.txt: 17,18,19,20
Then for the next step of the workflow, I created a download.sh shell script that consumes a comma-separated list of numbers and download the requested files. In the workflow, I setup a streaming action in Oozie and used the directory that contains files generated above as input (mapred.input.dir) and used download.sh as the mapper command and "cat" as the reducer command. I assumed that Hadoop will spawn a different mapper for each of the input files above.
This seems to work sometimes, it would download the files correctly, but sometimes it just get stuck trying to execute and I don't know why. I noticed that this happen when I increase the number of simultaneous downloads (e.g. instead of files per txt file, I would do 20 and so forth).
So my question is: Is this a correct way to implement parallel retrieval of files using MapReduce and OOZIE? If not, how is this normally done using OOZIE? I'm trying to get my CSV files into the HDFS prior to running the Hive script and I'm not sure what the best way would be to achieve that.
After looking deeper into this, it seems that creating an Oozie "Fork" node would be the best approach. So I created a fork node, under which I created 6 shell actions that executes download.sh and take the list of file numbers as an argument. So I ended up modifying the python script so it outputs the file numbers that need to be downloaded to STDOUT (instead of saving them on HDFS). I had oozie capture that output and then pass them as arguments to the download.sh forks.
Cloudera Hue interface does not provide a way to create fork nodes (at least not that I was able to find) so I downloaded the workflow.xml file and added the fork nodes myself and then re-imported it as a new workflow.
I got an application which is polling on a folder continuously. Once any file is ftp to the folder, the application has to move this file to some other folder for processing.
Here, we don't have any option to verify whether ftp is complete or not.
One command "lsof" is suggested in the technical forums. It got a file description column which gives the file status.
Since, this is a free bsd command and not present in old versions of linux, I want to clarify the usage of this command.
Can you guys tell us your experience in file verification and is there any other alternative solution available?
Also, is there any risk in using this utility?
Appreciate your help in advance.
Thanks,
Mathew Liju
We've done this before in a number of different ways.
Method one:
If you can control the process sending the files, have it send the file itself followed by a sentinel file. For example, send the real file "contracts.doc" followed by a one-byte "contracts.doc.sentinel".
Then have your listener process watch out for the sentinel files. When one of them is created, you should process the equivalent data file, then delete both.
Any data file that's more than a day old and doesn't have a corresponding sentinel file, get rid of it - it was a failed transmission.
Method two:
Keep an eye on the files themselves (specifically the last modification date/time). Only process files whose modification time is more than N minutes in the past. That increases the latency of processing the files but you can usually be certain that, if a file hasn't been written to in five minutes (for example), it's done.
Conclusion:
Both those methods have been used by us successfully in the past. I prefer the first but we had to use the second one once when we were not allowed to change the process sending the files.
The advantage of the first one is that you know the file is ready when the sentinel file appears. With both lsof (I'm assuming you're treating files that aren't open by any process as ready for processing) and the timestamps, it's possible that the FTP crashed in the middle and you may be processing half a file.
There are normally three approaches to this sort of problem.
providing a signal file so that when your file is transferred, an additional file is sent to mark that transfer is complete
add an entry to a log file within that directory to indicate a transfer is complete (this really only works if you have a single peer updating the directory, to avoid concurrency issues)
parsing the file to determine completeness. e.g. does the file start with a length field, or is it obviously incomplete ? e.g. parsing an incomplete XML file will result in a parse error due to the lack of an end element. Depending on your file's size and format, this can be trivial, or can be very time-consuming.
lsof would possibly be an option, although you've identified your Linux portability issue. If you use this, note the -F option, which formats the output suitable for processing by other programs, rather than being human-readable.
EDIT: Pax identified a fourth (!) method I'd forgotten - using the fact that the timestamp of the file hasn't updated in some time.
There is a fifth method. You can also check if the FTP Session is still active. This will work if every peer has it's own ftp user account. As long as the user is not logged off from FTP, assume the files are not complete.
I have an app that I'm writing that takes files in a specific directory that have been uploaded via SFTP and moves them to S3.
I have a problem where my cron job starts uploading a file when it's not completely uploaded. I have thought of every way to try and wait until the file is complete, but I have no way of knowing (that I know of).
I'm hoping that the collective genius of SO would be able to shed some light on this!
There are a number of ways to handle this:
Change the upload process to upload the data file itself (e.g., data.txt) followed by a sentinel file (e.g., data.txt.sentinel). Then wait for the sentinel before processing the data file and deleting them both. Data files older then N days with no corresponding sentinel - just delete them. This is only good if you can change the uploader.
If you can evaluate the content of the file to check completeness, this is another way. For example, if you're only uploading HTML files, you could check that it ends with </html>. Not always possible unless you can control what's being uploaded.
The not-been-modified-for-a-while method. Basically, if the file hasn't been modified for N minutes, you can assume the upload has been finished. This may still result in the processing of incomplete files where the transfer has failed partway through.
All these methods have their advantages and drawbacks and you will have to decide which is the best for you. We try to opt for number 1 where we can influence the uploading side.
And remember that N is configurable in the above scenarios. You need to balance the possibility that a too-small N will result in you processing an incomplete file in option 3 but too large a value of N will delay the processing of said file.
Is there any way you can add a step after the SFTP transfer? The idea is to SFTP the files to a temporary directory, then once that's done have the same client execute (via SSH) a script to mv the files over to the directory the cron job is looking at. mv is atomic on many local Unix filesystems, so the cron job will only either see the old file or the new one.
Of course, if you can execute a script after the SFTP transfer you can just have the script do the transfer to S3, without the cron job ;)
We are using pure-ftpd for a very similar process. Rather then having a cron job do the uploads, we use the upload script option of pure-ftp, which triggers a script every time an upload is complete. You might consider using a similar mechanism if it is available with your ftp server.