+1 to a serialization scheme. I'm happy to give early feedback. On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 8:34 AM Dan Davydov <ddavy...@twitter.com.invalid> wrote:
> I know the code around this is pretty hacky (if use_zip_file then... > instead of an abstraction). I know when it was added it was a bit > controversial, I would be +1 on removing it. That being said I feel the > entire DAG parsing process needs to be moved to the client-side (users who > write DAGs), with a serialization scheme. I'm working on a proposal for > this at the moment, and this would obviate even reading DAGs from the local > filesystem. > > Having everything zipped up gives us some assurance that when a DAG is > > updated, the whole thing is replaced as a single unit. > > I don't believe unzipping files gives this atomicity guarantee any more > than something like rsync --delete. >
