Cool! Glad it worked out.
The PR updated - I think that solves the main problem I had with the
ballooning number of images :). I guess with adding just one parallel
"slim" image to already existing images is far less controversial so I will
call for a lazy consensus :)
Thanks Jed It's quite obvious when you mentioned it,
Yeah. Indeed it's almost no difference, that will simplify things a lot.
Good Idea Jed. I will update the PR to reflect it :)
On Thu, May 5, 2022 at 10:17 AM Jarek Potiuk wrote:
> Good point. Let me try :)
>
>
> On Thu, May 5, 2022 at 5:57 AM Jed Cunningham
> wrote:
>
>> How much bigger would
Good point. Let me try :)
On Thu, May 5, 2022 at 5:57 AM Jed Cunningham
wrote:
> How much bigger would the image be if we included postgres, mysql, and
> mssql in the same image? That'd mean we'd have 4 vs 12 (ignoring the
> platform piece), and might be worth the tradeoff.
>
How much bigger would the image be if we included postgres, mysql, and
mssql in the same image? That'd mean we'd have 4 vs 12 (ignoring the
platform piece), and might be worth the tradeoff.
I also like the idea of SLIM images - always helpful.
Howard
On Wed, May 4, 2022 at 4:53 PM Ping Zhang wrote:
> Hi Jarek,
>
> I really like the idea of having a slim airflow docker image. 500MB
> uncompressed is tiny
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ping
>
>
> On Sun, May 1, 2022 at 8:41 AM Jarek Potiuk
Hi Jarek,
I really like the idea of having a slim airflow docker image. 500MB
uncompressed is tiny
Thanks,
Ping
On Sun, May 1, 2022 at 8:41 AM Jarek Potiuk wrote:
> And just to clarify. Those "slim" images are not at all "toothless". You
> can actually do stuff with them :)
>
> The 4
And just to clarify. Those "slim" images are not at all "toothless". You
can actually do stuff with them :)
The 4 providers that are preinstalled are there:
apache-airflow-providers-ftp| File Transfer Protocol (FTP)
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc114 | 2.1.2
Hello everyone,
TL;DR: I am looking for consensus on releasing "slim" versions of PROD
images - ones that will be way smaller and contain no providers nor
other extras and would be database-specific.
Context:
Now after we are done with some infra changes that were also released
in 2.3.0 I came
