It _shouldn't_, and we will test extensively with mysql.

Worse case is we'll have to fall back to managing the lock ourselves with a 
column rather than relying on db/row level locks. This might be a case where we 
have different/specialised behaviour for different dbs, or even db versions, if 
say mysql 8 behaves okay but 5.7/5.6 doesn't.

Ash

On 3 March 2020 07:01:15 GMT-05:00, "Kamil Breguła" <[email protected]> 
wrote:
>Hello,
>
>Will reliance on the database cause problems with MySQL? A lot of my
>users use this database.  I am afraid that the lock mechanism in MySQL
>is much less stable and predictable than PostgresSQL and this can
>cause various stability problems. I know that Astronomer uses
>PostgreSQL, but Airflow supports RDMS in a production environment and
>both must work properly in this AIP.
>
>Best regards,
>Kamil
>
>On Tue, Mar 3, 2020 at 12:50 PM Kaxil Naik <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Good work on the Proposal Ash & Vikram.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 10:39 PM Vikram Koka
><[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Team,
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > We just updated 'AIP-15 Support Multiple-Schedulers for HA & Better
>> > Scheduling Performance' on Confluence and would very much
>appreciate
>> > feedback and suggestions from the community.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=103092651
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > The original AIP was filed by Xiaodong Deng on March 2nd, 2019 and
>has
>> > stalled after a while, so with his blessing, we are taking the
>baton on
>> > this AIP. We at Astronomer have heard several enterprises ask for
>both High
>> > Availability as well as greater scalability, specifically around
>starting
>> > hundreds and thousands of tasks in a very short time window.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > We would like to attempt this based on our experience running
>Airflow as a
>> > Service and deploying Airflow at enterprises around the globe. We
>believe
>> > that this will benefit Airflow and fuel greater adoption of Airflow
>for
>> > production pipelines within enterprises.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Building on the original AIP, we have proposed an active/active
>model,
>> > where we can scale schedulers, but are staying away from the quorum
>> > approach. Xiaodong Deng had put in some really good thinking about
>the
>> > problem including approaches towards reducing contention between
>multiple
>> > schedulers and we have included some of those concepts here.
>Additional
>> > commenters had discussed the possibilities of leader selection and
>those
>> > challenges, and we have incorporated their thinking as well. .
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >  Any feedback, suggestions, and comments would be greatly
>appreciated.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Best Regards,
>> >
>> >
>> > Ash Berlin-Taylor and Vikram Koka
>> >

Reply via email to