You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
While reviewing work for #1361, I noticed that when transformations are called from the "Transformer interface for flow steps" functionality, not all configurable transform settings are available.
Since a custom cfg object is set before calling the transform() function,
I am not sure if this restriction is intentional, or a side effect we can work around by passing more data from nodesettings into the transform function. If this should be improved, please mention in the comments and we can figure out a way to proceed.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I think this is just a side effect from the additional options in the transform() function being added at a later point (specifically rawRecord), and that not being ported back into the flow step transformations. It should be simple enough to check whether relevant settings are present in the current step and add them in there, or alternatively to move the storeRawRecord one level higher to apply independent of the transform function and instead work solely off of nodeSettings.
While reviewing work for #1361, I noticed that when transformations are called from the "Transformer interface for flow steps" functionality, not all configurable transform settings are available.
Since a custom
cfg
object is set before calling thetransform()
function,openintegrationhub/lib/ferryman/lib/ferryman.js
Lines 534 to 539 in bbb147b
features which are configured inside https://github.com/openintegrationhub/openintegrationhub/blob/bbb147bf4373f1546de1f6a190bac505e00d3199/lib/ferryman/lib/transformer.js, such as the raw data storage will not be called before doing the transform, although the flow may be configured for it.
I am not sure if this restriction is intentional, or a side effect we can work around by passing more data from nodesettings into the transform function. If this should be improved, please mention in the comments and we can figure out a way to proceed.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: