RNHTTR opened a new issue, #35332: URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/35332
### Apache Airflow version Other Airflow 2 version (please specify below) ### What happened [This was reported for Airflow 2.5.3](https://apache-airflow.slack.com/archives/CCQ7EGB1P/p1698124263201309), but I suspect the behavior is still the same as I don't see any related issues/PRs. The [WORKER_CONCURRENCY configuration is rather counterintuitive](https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/4609); the configuration is specified by `max workers, min workers`. This can lead users to specify a maximum number of workers that is less than the minimum number of workers. I'm not entirely sure what happens when this is specified, but I don't believe it behaves normally. ### What you think should happen instead An exception should be raised if a user attempts to specify a maximum number of workers less than the minimum number of workers. ### How to reproduce Set `AIRFLOW__CELERY__WORKER_AUTOSCALE=1, 3`, and I suspect only 1 node will ever exist. https://airflow.apache.org/docs/apache-airflow-providers-celery/stable/configurations-ref.html#worker-autoscale ### Operating System n/a ### Versions of Apache Airflow Providers _No response_ ### Deployment Other ### Deployment details _No response_ ### Anything else _No response_ ### Are you willing to submit PR? - [X] Yes I am willing to submit a PR! ### Code of Conduct - [X] I agree to follow this project's [Code of Conduct](https://github.com/apache/airflow/blob/main/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.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. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected]
