potiuk commented on issue #20875:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/20875#issuecomment-1139580404
> because that will be major change for us it would also mean we use Python
3.7 or greater?
Python 3.6 reached end of life in October and stopped receiving security
fixes, so you are putting your company in a great risk by not migrating in
"planned" way - it is possible that a critical bug will be discovered and you
will HAVE TO upgrade in a hurry - like it was with Log4Shell - If your reason
is Python 3.6, I would strongly recommend you to start migration process now.
> Is the issue related to the Db upgrade or something related to the code?
The root cause is that your serialized dags are likely using some older
version of libraries and objects that are serialized are likely not restorable
with the new version. The "reserialize" will simply delete serialized dags from
the database which will force them to be re-serialized agaain. Think of it as a
"cached versions" of your DAGs.
> I believed this issue had been fixed in 2.2.5 - it originally occurred in
2.2.3 until I know - upgrading to 2.3.0 or 2.3.1 will it be solved ?
If you reserialize - likely yes. But the only way you can get it fixed is to
upgrade anyway, so holding off the upgrade makes no sense whatsovever even if
you are not sure if it is going to be fixed. There might be reason why any fix
might not work for you - but no-one will give you guarantee that your problem
will be fixed, I am afraid. This is free software. It comes with no such
guarantees. but if you need guarantees, then there are companies who provide
paid support, and there you can have more expectations I think. Since this is a
free and open software - you can also take a look at what the "reserialize"
command is doing - you can easily find it in the code and do similar thing
yourself, This is always an option, but then you take responsibility for us -
the maintainers decided to implement reserialize command to help in such cases
but this absolutely required to migrate to 2.3, but you can take the risk to
apply similar approach to pre 2.3. version (but it's your decision
and responsibility by not folowing the path recommended by maintainers).
So you have options - either you follow the way we recommend (and with good
support of the community) or choose to hold on an bear the consequences of the
decision :)
--
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: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
