GitHub user potiuk added a comment to the discussion: Thread-Powered Local 
Executor

This approach has multiple disadvantages. not the least of it is that each task 
is not isolated from each other and there are multiple problems connected with 
tasks shared in the same interpreter. Generically solving all the issues 
connected with it is not really feasible. But if **you** have **your case** 
where **all your tasks** are run with the code that **your** implementation 
will make sure to avoid side-effects connected then it might work.

But if you notice how many times **you** is mentioned there, you will see that 
yes - this is great idea for **your own executor** to implement. Which is 
perfectly fine. Airflow Allows you to implement your own executor and use it, 
and you are perfectly fine to do so. Whether this can be shared with other 
users, is debatable. It implies quite many limitations on how DAGs should be 
implemented by users using it and supporting all the edge cases is likely going 
to be costly.

I think a viable way of approach it is definitely first **you** implement it 
for your case and test. And battle test it. And figure out limitations that you 
document. Then - you will see if the limitations are good enough and easy to 
explain and document, so that average DAG author and DAGs developed by them 
will run without troubles.

THEN the next step is to open a discussion in the devlist - this is where 
important additions to the community that inevitably lead to maintenance effort 
from the community side should be discussed. Ideally with experience and 
findings of you implementing your solution and battle-testing it.

For now - I will convert it to a discussion if you need more feedback - but if 
you get to a stage where thigns are battle-tested and you have enough findings 
- feel free to start a discussion in devlist

GitHub link: 
https://github.com/apache/airflow/discussions/57699#discussioncomment-14848117

----
This is an automatically sent email for [email protected].
To unsubscribe, please send an email to: [email protected]

Reply via email to