borismo commented on issue #25904:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/25904#issuecomment-2673749167

   Elad, thanks a lot for pointing to the PR and your explanation. Now I think 
I get the reasoning.
   
   It's a valid one: I also prefer when operators just works.
   
   However in this case, we went from: a not ideal situation (some care is 
needed to use the provider with PAT if concurrency is needed) to: the provider 
is completely unusable for Tableau Cloud users. In my opinion, the provider was 
not improved as a result.
   If using PAT presented a security risk, removing the feature would be a good 
thing, but as far as I understand, that is not the case.
   
   About workarounds: it's a matter of perceptions, but I don't find using 
pools, `blocking_refresh=False` and a sensor very complex. There is no code 
smell, no hack. It's using Airflow's and the provider's capabilities to make 
something work. Indeed, generally, I prefer to use just one operator with all 
defaults (AKA "it just works").
   [Airflow's 
pools](https://airflow.apache.org/docs/apache-airflow/stable/administration-and-deployment/pools.html)
 exist because "Some systems can get overwhelmed when too many processes hit 
them at the same time.". Well, Tableau gets overwhelmed when more than 1 
process hits it at the same time.
   
   Now, Tableau Cloud users must either:
   - stick to Airflow < 2.10.5
   - play with the requirements to pin the provider's version
   - not use the provider, and implement a custom task, which surely goes 
against the spirit of reusing community-provided operators to avoid reinventing 
the wheel
   
   I strongly prefer tweaking my DAG a bit to use the provider than any of 
these 3 alternatives I could think of.
   
   Regarding Tableau's involvement, are you aware of any contact attempt?


-- 
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