potiuk merged PR #35653:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/35653
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commits-unsubscr...@airflow.a
jscheffl commented on PR #35653:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/35653#issuecomment-1957365783
So, GREEN! Now just another second reviewer needed here... then for me this
is looking good.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, p
potiuk commented on PR #35653:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/35653#issuecomment-1956447765
(In this case it would have saved you 2 hours)
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to g
potiuk commented on PR #35653:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/35653#issuecomment-1956446729
I clicked "Rebase" button - but it's always faster for you to do rather than
wait for someone (in the future) @hterik
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
potiuk commented on PR #35653:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/35653#issuecomment-1956445309
> Thanks @jscheffl , can you please retrigger the failing CI actions? I've
run all the unit tests locally now and the CI failures are passing locally.
No you need to rebase for tha
hterik commented on PR #35653:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/35653#issuecomment-1956220869
Thanks @jscheffl , can you please retrigger the failing CI actions? I've run
all the unit tests locally now and the CI failures are passing locally.
--
This is an automated message fro
jscheffl commented on PR #35653:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/35653#issuecomment-1954980699
@hterik before I do a full test, do you have any recommondation how to test?
Did you use any example DAG and timeout?
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To
potiuk commented on PR #35653:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/35653#issuecomment-1954351092
> Latest CI failures look unrelated to change, can someone please help rerun
it.
The main i broken, and it's being fixed in #37559
> In the meantime, I'm really struggling
hterik commented on PR #35653:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/35653#issuecomment-1954140677
Latest CI failures look unrelated to change, can someone please help rerun
it.
(`Airflow FS S3 protocol requires the s3fs library, but it is not installed
as it requiresaiobotocor
jscheffl commented on PR #35653:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/35653#issuecomment-1873017894
I was reading through the discussion and found this PR now being a bit stale.
I'd make a full review if nobody objects.
Before merge though I would kindly request a re-base and
github-actions[bot] commented on PR #35653:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/35653#issuecomment-1872632280
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
potiuk commented on PR #35653:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/35653#issuecomment-1812349726
> An in general need to check other Airflow codebase (core), that we do not
miss to catch `AirflowTaskTimeout` where it required, because right now we
could catch as `AirflowException` i
hterik commented on PR #35653:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/35653#issuecomment-1812328332
> An in general need to check other Airflow codebase (core), that we do not
miss to catch `AirflowTaskTimeout` where it required, because right now we
could catch as `AirflowException` i
Taragolis commented on PR #35653:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/35653#issuecomment-1812312826
For example `StandardTaskRunner`
https://github.com/apache/airflow/blob/1e24a3cf96c2b14b69532c604bdedb8f9ea720de/airflow/task/task_runner/standard_task_runner.py#L104-L133
--
Taragolis commented on PR #35653:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/35653#issuecomment-1812279786
An in general need to check other Airflow codebase (core), that we do not
miss to catch `AirflowTaskTimeout` where it required, because right now we
could catch as `AirflowException`
potiuk commented on PR #35653:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/35653#issuecomment-1812193221
> Hmm, SIGALARM wouldn't be injected in the middle of C-extension execution
but it would stay pending until the extension returns to Python execution at
least right? So it won't be total
hterik commented on PR #35653:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/35653#issuecomment-1812174736
Hmm, SIGALARM wouldn't be injected in the middle of C-extension execution
but it would stay pending until the extension returns to Python execution at
least right? So it won't be totally
potiuk commented on PR #35653:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/35653#issuecomment-1812164143
> Code that normally catches Exception should not implicitly ignore
interrupts from AirflowTaskTimout.
>
> Fixes #35644 #35474
I do not think #35474 is fixed by it. We STILL
hterik opened a new pull request, #35653:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/35653
Code that normally catches Exception should not implicitly ignore interrupts
from AirflowTaskTimout.
Fixes #35644 #35474
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
19 matches
Mail list logo
