geraj1010 commented on code in PR #48466:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/48466#discussion_r2070752128
##########
providers/dbt/cloud/src/airflow/providers/dbt/cloud/operators/dbt.py:
##########
@@ -213,7 +213,12 @@ def execute(self, context: Context):
):
self.log.info("Job run %s has completed successfully.",
self.run_id)
else:
- raise DbtCloudJobRunException(f"Job run {self.run_id} has
failed or has been cancelled.")
+ # Gather job run details (including run steps), so we can
output the logs from each step
+ run_details = self.hook.get_job_run(
+ run_id=self.run_id, account_id=self.account_id,
include_related=["run_steps"]
+ ).json()["data"]
+
+ raise DbtCloudJobRunDetailsException(self.run_id,
run_details)
Review Comment:
I'm not opposed to that. The only place I see the original exception
`DbtCloudJobRunException` being used, is in the hook method
`wait_for_job_run_status`. I think we would still want the ability to retain
the same message for that method though, so I will need to refactor the new
exception to allow for custom message. In addition, I think I might use the old
name for the exception, since there would no longer be a need to distinguish
between the two exceptions IMO.
`wait_for_job_run_status` does have `account_id` in its signature, so I
think I can utilize the new exception there, with the suggested refactoring
above.
If there is potential for many new exceptions in the future, then I think it
would make sense to have a separate module for them.
--
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]
