Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Purge existing SLA implementation #42285

Open
wants to merge 8 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Purge existing SLA implementation #42285

wants to merge 8 commits into from

Conversation

ferruzzi
Copy link
Contributor

@ferruzzi ferruzzi commented Sep 17, 2024 •
edited
Loading

As discussed in the Airflow 3.0 dev calls, the first step for the new SLA system is stripping the existing implementation out.

I did this PR in multiple commits to try to make it more transparent. In this PR:

  1. Remove everything related to SLA in the code.
  2. Add back the absolute minimum so that existing DAGs won't throw an exception. @bbovenzi said he can add a UI banner so any DAG which implements an SLA will get a notification that SLA is not working in 3.0, but we don't want all existing DAGs to start throwing exceptions left and right either.
  3. Added a log message to models/dag which triggers if the DAG is init'ed with an "sla_miss_callback"
  4. Went through the docs directory and stripped out all references to the SLA feature.

@ferruzzi ferruzzi force-pushed the ferruzzi/sla2/0-purge-old-code branch from 5560ba3 to f62927e Compare September 18, 2024 16:15
o-nikolas
o-nikolas reviewed Sep 18, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@o-nikolas o-nikolas left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

There are is an SLA related configuration that I don't see removed in this PR?
https://airflow.apache.org/docs/apache-airflow/stable/configurations-ref.html#check-slas

docs/apache-airflow/core-concepts/tasks.rst Show resolved Hide resolved
@jscheffl jscheffl added the airflow3.0:breaking Candidates for Airflow 3.0 that contain breaking changes label Sep 18, 2024
jscheffl
jscheffl approved these changes Sep 18, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@jscheffl jscheffl left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ah, added the breaking label, now CI test fails with exactly the comment I wanted to make - please add a newsfragment for the breaking change
Otherwise - looks good for me.

I am a bit surprised that the carve-out of SLA just gains 1k LoC

@ferruzzi
Copy link
Contributor Author

ferruzzi commented Sep 18, 2024 •
edited
Loading

I am a bit surprised that the carve-out of SLA just gains 1k LoC

Yeah. It's an odd one. I really expected this to be a much larger surgery with tendrils all over the place. It wasn't as bad as I had feared; 28 files is pretty broad but a solid chunk of them are docs pages which just linked back tot he SLA concept page.

please add a newsfragment for the breaking change

I should have known to do that, sorry. I'll add it.

There are is an SLA related configuration that I don't see removed in this PR?

Yeah, I may have missed that one. I'll make another pass and see what I can find related to "check_slas" and prune it.

Maybe a sentence or two describing this feature as deprecated in 3.0? And that there are plans to add it back in 3.1?

I'll come up with something.

@ferruzzi ferruzzi force-pushed the ferruzzi/sla2/0-purge-old-code branch from 224fe96 to 25e1a7f Compare September 19, 2024 21:36
romsharon98
romsharon98 reviewed Sep 20, 2024
View reviewed changes
airflow/models/baseoperator.py
@@ -975,7 +965,6 @@ def __init__(
if self.pool_slots < 1:
dag_str = f" in dag {dag.dag_id}" if dag else ""
raise ValueError(f"pool slots for {self.task_id}{dag_str} cannot be less than 1")
self.sla = sla
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

shouldn't we add here also a deprecation warning like you added here?
https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/42285/files#diff-62c8e300ee91e0d59f81e0ea5d30834f04db71ae74f2e155a10b51056b00b59bR639

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I considered it, but then I think we'll be getting a lot of duplicate warnings. I think in one place should be good?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@romsharon98 romsharon98 romsharon98 approved these changes

@jscheffl jscheffl jscheffl approved these changes

@o-nikolas o-nikolas o-nikolas approved these changes

@vincbeck vincbeck vincbeck approved these changes

@eladkal eladkal Awaiting requested review from eladkal eladkal is a code owner

@uranusjr uranusjr Awaiting requested review from uranusjr uranusjr is a code owner

@potiuk potiuk Awaiting requested review from potiuk potiuk is a code owner

@kaxil kaxil Awaiting requested review from kaxil kaxil is a code owner

@jedcunningham jedcunningham Awaiting requested review from jedcunningham jedcunningham is a code owner

@ephraimbuddy ephraimbuddy Awaiting requested review from ephraimbuddy ephraimbuddy is a code owner

@ashb ashb Awaiting requested review from ashb ashb is a code owner

@bolkedebruin bolkedebruin Awaiting requested review from bolkedebruin bolkedebruin is a code owner

@XD-DENG XD-DENG Awaiting requested review from XD-DENG XD-DENG is a code owner

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
airflow3.0:breaking Candidates for Airflow 3.0 that contain breaking changes area:providers area:Scheduler including HA (high availability) scheduler area:serialization kind:documentation provider:amazon-aws AWS/Amazon - related issues provider:pagerduty provider:slack provider:smtp
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
5 participants
@ferruzzi @romsharon98 @o-nikolas @jscheffl @vincbeck