uranusjr commented on PR #37087:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/37087#issuecomment-2089546284
I think this is superceded by https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/39165
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to Git
uranusjr closed pull request #37087: Add new run type "triggered" to
distinguish manual DAG runs and triggered DAG runs
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/37087
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
github-actions[bot] commented on PR #37087:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/37087#issuecomment-2089321356
This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because it has not
had recent activity. It will be closed in 5 days if no further activity occurs.
Thank you for you
molcay commented on PR #37087:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/37087#issuecomment-1994302703
@uranusjr,
> Instead of NULL, I would just add a type scheduler instead
I think this can be done also.
> Should this value be shown anywhere on the UI?
We can use differen
uranusjr commented on PR #37087:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/37087#issuecomment-1992269005
I like having this new field. Instead of NULL, I would just add a type
`scheduler` instead. Should this value be shown anywhere on the UI?
--
This is an automated message from the Ap
molcay commented on PR #37087:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/37087#issuecomment-1991817431
@potiuk thank you for the detailed answer. Your suggestion makes sense
totally.
I started to have a look what we can do and started to do some PoC.
Here is the summary of what
potiuk commented on PR #37087:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/37087#issuecomment-1980011456
How about adding a flag "kind of manual" dag run ? I think "manual" is not
as bad as it is for all that kinds of ways DAG can be run "manually". I think
it will be far easier to keep sin
VladaZakharova commented on PR #37087:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/37087#issuecomment-1976365070
Hi @eladkal @uranusjr !
Thank you for checking changes in this pr
The purpose of this PR is to add more detailed information to our DagRun
status so it will be easier for us
uranusjr commented on PR #37087:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/37087#issuecomment-1974912444
To be short, I do not think we should add this. TriggerDagRunOperator is not
special enough to warrant a separate type. The change is small in lines
changed, but large in how it change
molcay commented on PR #37087:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/37087#issuecomment-1964104235
Hello @eladkal, I am pinging you in case of you forget this discussion :)
If you have any suggestions, addition or any other thing, we can do it and
have more clear understanding and
molcay commented on PR #37087:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/37087#issuecomment-1934218563
> I am not sure I agree. Rest API can invoke dag manually or also with some
external service that invoke dags periodically. From business point of view it
can be considered also as manua
eladkal commented on PR #37087:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/37087#issuecomment-1929436281
> I think this PR will help us to distinguish manually triggered and
programmatically triggered DAG runs as a beginning. If we want, we can add a
new type for REST API calls or we can j
VladaZakharova commented on PR #37087:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/37087#issuecomment-1926640135
Hi @uranusjr @eladkal !
Can we merge these changes? Thanks :)
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub
molcay commented on PR #37087:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/37087#issuecomment-1921398205
> Not sure if it belongs to this PR but if it's not too much work can u add
it to the cluster activity?
Hi @romsharon98,
Thank you for pointing out, it looks like it is an rathe
eladkal commented on PR #37087:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/37087#issuecomment-1919393551
I am worried this may cause extra confusion. For example with triggering
DAGRun via the rest API.
WDYT?
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to t
romsharon98 commented on PR #37087:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/37087#issuecomment-1919379276
Not sure if it belongs to this PR but if it's not too much work can u add it
to the cluster activity?
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to th
molcay commented on PR #37087:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/37087#issuecomment-1916616603
Hi @uranusjr,
I think the use case is a bit different from the datasets. Let's have an
following DAG as an example;
```python3
import random
from airflow import models
molcay opened a new pull request, #37087:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/37087
Add new run type "triggered" to distinguish manual DAG runs and triggered
DAG runs (`TriggerDagRunOperator`).
### Justification to introduce a new RunType
Before this improvement, we were pr
uranusjr commented on PR #37087:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/37087#issuecomment-1916457787
Is using datasets an alternative? This is one of the improvements the
mechanism brought.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, pleas
19 matches
Mail list logo
