SamWheating opened a new pull request #13554: URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/13554
<!-- Thank you for contributing! Please make sure that your code changes are covered with tests. And in case of new features or big changes remember to adjust the documentation. Feel free to ping committers for the review! In case of existing issue, reference it using one of the following: closes: #ISSUE related: #ISSUE How to write a good git commit message: http://chris.beams.io/posts/git-commit/ --> I don't think it makes sense to have `{num_processors}+1` parsing processes makes sense, as the processes won't all be able to execute in parallel. I believe that this is supposed to say `{num_processors}-1`, which would also agree with [this blog post from Astronomer](https://airflow.apache.org/docs/apache-airflow/stable/faq.html#how-to-reduce-airflow-dag-scheduling-latency-in-production) Discussed with @mik-laj on slack and they were in agreement. --- Read the **[Pull Request Guidelines](https://github.com/apache/airflow/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.rst#pull-request-guidelines)** for more information. In case of fundamental code change, Airflow Improvement Proposal ([AIP](https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/AIRFLOW/Airflow+Improvements+Proposals)) is needed. In case of a new dependency, check compliance with the [ASF 3rd Party License Policy](https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-x). In case of backwards incompatible changes please leave a note in [UPDATING.md](https://github.com/apache/airflow/blob/master/UPDATING.md). ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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. For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected]
