AutomationDev85 commented on PR #43737:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/43737#issuecomment-2461447690

   > Should not that capacity be a task parameter rather than executor config 
parameter on DAG level. We have similar concept with `pool_slots` and there 
they are "per task" - and part of the BaseOperator. It seems to be way more 
flexible to specify it this way (additionally then this could be renamed as 
"task_slots" - to be similar to "pool_slots") or maybe even we should combine 
the two. This way it will also be potentially usable by other executors.
   
   I was thinking in the same way, but during coding I saw that the 
need_capacity parameter is no easy to get into the executor. We have to tough 
core code like TaskInstanceKey class to get the info into the Executor. My main 
idea is to tough only Edge package t and then make a later PR which can add 
this changes into the core because the Edge package is the only which will 
support this feature for the moment and it is not released yet.
   So what is your opinion about that? 
   Shall we change this also in this PR or in a separate PR? 
   During writing this lines I have also the feeling to use still the term 
concurrency instead of capacity. Then it is easier to adapt this to already 
existing Executor code in the future.


-- 
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: [email protected]

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]

Reply via email to