fix(scheduler_job_runner/asset): fix how asset dag warning is added #43873
+144
−23
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
boring-cyborg
bot
added
the
area:Scheduler
Lee-W
changed the title
Lee-W
force-pushed
the
fix-asset-dag-warning
branch
from
9bc9afa
to
4bc18b3
Compare
Lee-W
commented
Nov 11, 2024
| def _get_first_item(x: Sequence[Any]) -> Any: | ||
| return x[0] | ||
|
|
||
| warnings_to_have = { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@uranusjr, I'm not sure whether we want to warn a case like this 🤔 It kinda makes the logic a bit more complicated. The message is just concatenated.
schedule=(
Asset(name="asset1_producer", uri="s3://bucket/asset1_producer1")
| Asset(name="asset1_producer", uri="s3://bucket/asset1_producer2")
| Asset(name="asset1_producer", uri="s3://bucket/asset1_producer3")
| Asset(name="asset1_producer", uri="s3://bucket/asset1_producer4")
),
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do you mean we should reduce the warnings from 3 to 1?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In the existing logic, we only raise the latest one (if I'm not mistaken). In this implementation, the error will look like "Cannot activate asset Asset(...); ... is already associated to ...\nCannot activate asset Asset(...); ... is already associated to ...".
I don't think we can add multiple DagWarning unless we want to remove the unique constriant 🤔
uranusjr
reviewed
Nov 12, 2024
uranusjr
reviewed
Nov 12, 2024
uranusjr
reviewed
Nov 12, 2024
The correct logic is 1. Find the warning that should exist after this round 2. Delete the warnings that no longer needed 3. Update the warnings if already exist and add new warnings if not yet exists
…th_multiple_conflict_asset_in_one_dag
…s multiple conflict asset
Lee-W
force-pushed
the
fix-asset-dag-warning
branch
from
4bc18b3
to
8b00864
Compare
ephraimbuddy
approved these changes
Nov 13, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Why
The logic for activating assets is not correct now.
What
The correct logic is
Related PR: #43693 (that one fix the logic in the wrong way and is fixed in this PR)
^ Add meaningful description above
Read the Pull Request Guidelines for more information.
In case of fundamental code changes, an Airflow Improvement Proposal (AIP) is needed.
In case of a new dependency, check compliance with the ASF 3rd Party License Policy.
In case of backwards incompatible changes please leave a note in a newsfragment file, named
{pr_number}.significant.rstor{issue_number}.significant.rst, in newsfragments.