uranusjr commented on code in PR #25883: URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/25883#discussion_r954858023
########## docs/apache-airflow/templates-ref.rst: ########## @@ -26,12 +26,29 @@ The following come for free out of the box with Airflow. Additional custom macros can be added globally through :doc:`/plugins`, or at a DAG level through the ``DAG.user_defined_macros`` argument. +.. _templates:basics: + +Note on Scheduling Basics +------------------------- + +Airflow schedules tasks at the **end** of the interval (see :doc:`/scheduler`). + +Meaning that when you do: + | start_date: datetime(2018, 1, 1, 8, 0,0) + | schedule_interval: '0 8 * * *' + +The first run will kick in at ``2018-01-02 at 08:00+-`` (depends on resources) - but ds and ds_nodash will +contain ``2018-01-01``/``20180101`` as **logical** start date. That is **yesterday** from the point of view +of the actual execution day. + +(Elad Kalif/Peter Mortensen: https://stackoverflow.com/a/65196624) Review Comment: Would it be a good idea if we *move* some of the content here? The main thing I’m wondering is it is difficult to keep multiple documentation sections in sync (for example if we need to change the semantics of those variables a bit—which we actually just did not too long ago), so minimise duplication would be helpful. If the content reads well here for you, would you say some of the content might not flow as well in their existing locations? (This is purely an open question; I have no answers and your opinions would be most helpful.) -- 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]
