Hi all, we are using postgres with airflow 1.10.1 on python2, if i submit
multiple dag runs some of them fail with "NoResultFound: No row was found for
one()" i found a similar issue here:
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/54412780/airflow-1-10-sqlalchemy-orm-exc-noresultfound-no-row-was-found
Hi,
I'd like to get access to post a new AIP. My username on confluence is
jm.carp. Thanks!
Josh
Based on my observation of Kafka KIP, KIP usually could be very
comprehensive which is almost like a tech spec including: 1. motivation; 2.
what new public interface it tries to propose; 3. what are the rejected
alternatives with what reason; 4. what could be the failure scenarios etc.
And it see
Following the comments to warn users about dropping Python 2, I went ahead and
added the deprecation library to Airflow in this PR:
https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/4763, and added the first @deprecated
annotation.
I checked a few major packages and all use some self-made annotation for
Great discussions!
Two minor points from me:
- For the workflow Ash summarised: may I remind that we may want to decide how
long the vote on an AIP should be open as well (3, 5,or 7 days?). This can be
decided later when the workflow is formalised.
- For the process description Fokko proposed:
+1 for having AIPs backed by PRs.
About having multiple PR for an AIP. I feels like it might cause overturn
on an accepted AIP. Say idea in AIP and phase 1 PR all look good but in
phase 2 we encountered blockers and have to employ creative solutions that
is against the AIP. I think if an AIP is la
An AIP should be a couple of PR's. I think splitting up major code changes
into multiple PR's is a good thing to maintain progress and you don't need
to resolve the conflicts all the time.
We could also look at different Apache projects. For example, for Kafka you
need to open a KIP if you're chan
My thinking on AIPs that have a PR is that a vote on the AIP is "is this
feature/design goal a good idea" but discussion about the code or merging the
pr can happen on GitHub as usual.
For example AIP-12 is an excellent Idea but there are a few questions to answer
about the design. (The author
Finally!
+1 (non-binding)
On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 5:40 PM abhishek sharma
wrote:
> +1(binding)
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 2:09 PM Arthur Wiedmer
> wrote:
>
> > +1 (binding)
> >
> > This is the direction we should be taking.
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 9:28 AM Ash Berlin-Taylor
> wrote:
Sorry about being late to this. Love this change. Will look deep into this
in the next couple of days.
Thank you,
Kevin Y
On Sat, Feb 23, 2019 at 10:54 PM Tao Feng wrote:
> I manage to test out the latest version of the branch which I think all my
> previous concerns don't exist anymore. Great
10 matches
Mail list logo
