I say lets remove it in 2.0.
> On 27 Feb 2019, at 11:50, Driesprong, Fokko <fo...@driesprong.frl> wrote:
>
> Are we going to remove the MesosExecutor? I think it is a safe bet since in
> the Survey of Ash (thanks again for that!), it also shows that nobody is
> really using it.
>
> https://jira.apache.org/jira/browse/AIRFLOW-3969
>
> Cheers, Fokko
>
> Op di 12 feb. 2019 om 10:28 schreef Ash Berlin-Taylor <a...@apache.org>:
>
>> I’m glad yarn wasn’t the only option - it would have meant I’d have never
>> been in a position to use Airflow! (Many of our workflows don’t touch
>> EMR/Hadoop, and running Celery is much more of a known element to a python
>> developer than configuring Yarn)
>>
>>> On 11 Feb 2019, at 17:14, Maxime Beauchemin <maximebeauche...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> From memory, I think MesosExecutor depends on pickling to get DAG
>>> definitions to workers, which we should also deprecate.
>>>
>>> About CeleryExecutor, we never had the intention to make it the
>> recommended
>>> option for production early on. The intent back in 2014 was to write a
>>> YarnExecutor quickly (that was before the rise of k8s), but realized that
>>> container support wasn't ready in Yarn at the time, and had hard
>>> restrictions on what we could install on Hadoop/Yarn data nodes, so we
>>> moved forward with Celery.
>>>
>>> I think it's practical to have LocalExecutor around though for unit test,
>>> local use, and for POCs.
>>>
>>> Max
>>>
>>> On Sat, Feb 9, 2019 at 5:59 AM Olivier Girardot <
>>> o.girar...@lateral-thoughts.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi, we tried to use it for a new project 1year ago, but it was too
>> broken
>>>> to be usable, and we didn't have the time to make it work.
>>>> Of course we are still hoping to use it one day, but that doesn't mean
>> it
>>>> should not move to contrib, it was already clear from the documentation
>>>> that it was not a first class citizen.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Olivier.
>>>>
>>>> Le dim. 27 janv. 2019 à 12:12, Ash Berlin-Taylor <a...@apache.org> a
>> écrit
>>>> :
>>>>
>>>>> That PR pre-dates 1.9.0 being released.
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 27 Jan 2019, at 06:57, airflowuser <airflowu...@protonmail.com
>>>> .INVALID>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The Mesos executor is being used (at least by some people) and there
>> is
>>>>> an open PR to extend it:
>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/3739
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
>>>>>> On Friday, January 25, 2019 7:30 PM, Kaxil Naik <kaxiln...@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What about Dask Executor as well.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Fri, Jan 25, 2019, 16:35 Daniel Imberman <
>>>> daniel.imber...@gmail.com
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> @sid basically my response lol
>>>>>>>> I haven't seen any emails from any users and if it's been broken for
>>>>> two
>>>>>>>> versions then there doesn't seem to be enough interest to maintain
>>>> it.
>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jan 25, 2019, 8:27 AM Sid Anand r39...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> LOL :_0
>>>>>>>>> -s
>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 8:25 AM Bolke de Bruin bdbr...@gmail.com
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I agree. Maybe we should make a choice on what we consider 1st
>>>> class
>>>>>>>>>> executors and move others to contrib (I'm looking at you celery)
>>>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 25 Jan 2019, at 12:46, Ash Berlin-Taylor a...@apache.org
>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Is anyone using the Mesos Executor? I think we should deprecate
>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>> remove it.
>>>>>>>>>>> The reason I say that is I have a feeling it's been broken since
>>>>>>>>>>> 1.9.0
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> and no-one has noticed:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> class MesosExecutor(BaseExecutor, LoginMixin):
>>>>>>>>>>> def start(self):
>>>>>>>>>>> # ...
>>>>>>>>>>> self.log.info(
>>>>>>>>>>> 'MesosFramework master : %s, name : %s, cpu : %s, mem :
>>>>>>>>>>> %s,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> checkpoint : %s',
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> master, framework.name,
>>>>>>>>>>> str(task_cpu), str(task_memory),
>>>> str(framework.checkpoint)
>>>>>>>>>>> )
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> That mixin should have been LoggingMixin, not LoginMixin. But
>>>> given
>>>>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>>> bug has been in since
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/commit/a7a518902dcf1e7fd4bf477cf57cee691f181b29
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> which was in the 1.9.0 release I propose we simply remove this
>>>>> executor
>>>>>>>>>> from master.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>>>>>>> Ash
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
