yuqian90 commented on PR #46663: URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/46663#issuecomment-2903115362
Since we have renamed `execution_date` to `logical_date` everywhere, does it still make sense to enforce that tasks with a future `logical_date` should not execute? `logical_date` should have no relationship to what time a task executes. It is just a date used to logically organize dagruns. In my own use case, we organize dagruns using logical_date, and there are many template macros that rely on `logical_date`. Some tasks with logical_date 20250523 needs to execute before 20250523 00:00 UTC because they need to handle data for countries such as Australia or Japan. I also vaguely remember other use cases where Airflow is used to organize weather forecast data days in advance so using a future logical_date makes sense. Regarding the suggestion "If a date is needed, it can be passed as a DAG param instead", this is not optimal because DAG param can't be a first class citizen in the UI. E.g. if we wanna filter by a date in the UI or sort dagruns by a date, we can't rely on a date that only resides in the param. Using logical_date for such purpose is exactly what "logical date" should be used for. If there are no objections, I don't mind putting up a PR to remove this limitation of not allowing future logical_date to execute. -- 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]
