I love this idea, I think it would really help with organising dags and
categorising them.

Thanks and Regards,
Aritra Basu


On Thu, Jun 27, 2024 at 10:08 AM Amogh Desai <[email protected]>
wrote:

> I like this idea too.
>
> The ability to extend filtering at this level would be fantastic. IIUC, the
> filtering is at a "UI" only level
> and is transient too. Moving this logic to the backend using a new API (or
> existing ones) and grouping
> the dags would be a nice feature to have, making Airflow UI much more
> intuitive.
>
> I am not so sure what you mean by "domain" though..
>
> Thanks & Regards,
> Amogh Desai
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 8:03 PM Constance Martineau
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > I love it and 100% agree. Thinking "Dag Groups", where you can group dags
> > (static & dynamic) into a subfolder. Tags are great for filtering, but
> they
> > aren't a replacement for dirs especially at a large scale. We have some
> > deployments with 20k dags and as designed today, it's not navigable at
> that
> > scale. This could help
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 9:04 AM Blain David <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Beside the new interface and getting rid off FAB in Airflow 3.0, a cool
> > > and handy feature would be to be able to group multiple DAG's so you
> > could
> > > order them by like domain or whatever grouping you want to achieve.
> > > Okay, you can achieve the same with filtering, and maybe the we could
> use
> > > that feature to achieve the grouping but still it would make the UI
> more
> > > convenient to use, especially if you have to manage multiple dynamic
> > DAG's
> > > which are related to the same domain. It would be nice I you could like
> > > create a group which always apply the filtering in a stateful manner.
> Or
> > > we could opt to really implement a dedicated grouping mechanism so that
> > you
> > > could for example specify in your DAG to which group it belongs.  What
> do
> > > you guys think?  I would be willing to help and contribute of course.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to