dirkrkotzeml opened a new issue, #45550:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45550

   ### Apache Airflow Provider(s)
   
   amazon
   
   ### Versions of Apache Airflow Providers
   
   8.27.0
   
   ### Apache Airflow version
   
   2.7.2
   
   ### Operating System
   
   Amazon Linux 
   
   ### Deployment
   
   Amazon (AWS) MWAA
   
   ### Deployment details
   
   Standard MWAA deployment - V2.7.2
   
   ### What happened
   
   SageMakerProcessingJobs have a hard limit of 64 characters for the 
ProcessingJobName.
   In the SageMakerBaseOperator there is a check for uniqueness for the name. 
   In the case that a name is not unique it adds a timestamp to prevent a 
potential collision, however there is no check to prevent the updated 
<jobname>-<timestamp> from exceeding 64 characters. This causes the creation of 
the SageMakerProcessingJob to fail. 
   
   
   ### What you think should happen instead
   
   
   In the SageMaker Pipelines SDK they truncate the base name before adding the 
timestamp, therefor we recommend taking  a similar approach for consistency 
purposes. 
   
   ### How to reproduce
   
   Create a SageMaker ProcessingJob using the SageMakerProcessingOperator with 
a name of longer than 50 characters, and trigger it more than once. On the 
second time it is triggered the time stamp will be added and in the airflow 
logs it will show the error stating the sagemaker processing job failed to 
create due to the name exceeding the character limit 
   
   ### Anything else
   
   Every time that a scheduled run occurs with the same name (after the first 
run) 
   
   ### 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]

Reply via email to