potiuk edited a comment on issue #17834:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/17834#issuecomment-906207958
You are right we cannot do a "generic" python operator but maybe we could
have some variant of AbstractAsyncPythonSensor (Abstract class). This could
allow you to define a truly async Python operator. I could imagine API like
that (pseudo-code):
```
class AbstractAsyncPythonSensor(Sensor):
def __init__(self, poke_method: Callable):
....
async def wait():
raise NotImplemeted()
```
Then you could define your own SpecificAsyncPythonSensor - where wait()
method would be an async method doing await internally on somehing in triggerer
but then the poke method would be actually executed in worker after the task
is started.
I think that could be the closest it can get to async/awaitable Python
generic operator/sensor :)
WDYT? It is a bit of an improvement over having to always write a new class.
If you have potentially different sensor logic (but all sensors being awoken on
the same kind of stuff (for example an SQS message coming), that might be a
nice tool.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commits-unsubscr...@airflow.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org
