Thanks for the detailed debugging! It gives us a point where to look at.

B.

Verstuurd vanaf mijn iPad

> Op 29 mei 2019 om 08:49 heeft Emmanuel Brard 
> <[email protected]> het volgende geschreven:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> We have noticed the same thing. On way for us to unblock it was to restart
> the scheduler (there is a function that check missing tasks in executor at
> the scheduler start-up phase).
> We implemented a health-check that checks for these kind of stuck queued
> tasks, but obviously fixing it in airflow core would be better.
> 
> Cheers,
> E
> 
> On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 8:01 AM [email protected] <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> 
>> Hi All,
>> We are observing intermittently  that Tasks get stuck in queued state and
>> never get executed by Airflow.
>> On debugging it we found that one of the queued dependency was not met due
>> to which task did not move from queued to running state. So task remained
>> in queued state.
>> (are_dependencies_met function returned false for QUEUE_DEPS inside
>> _check_and_change_state_before_execution)
>> 
>> By looking into scheduler code it seems that scheduler does not reschedule
>> the queued state tasks due to which task never got added to executor queue
>> again and remained stuck in queued state.
>> 
>> There is a logic inside _check_and_change_state_before_execution function
>> to move the task from queued to None state(which gets picked by scheduler
>> for rescheduling) if RUN_DEPS are not met but this logic seems to be
>> missing for QUEUE_DEPS.
>> 
>> It seems that task should be moved to None state even if QUEUE_DEPS are
>> not met.
>> Any help/pointer on this would be useful.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Raman Gupta
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> GetYourGuide AG
> 
> Stampfenbachstrasse 48  
> 
> 8006 Zürich
> 
> Switzerland
> 
> 
> 
> <https://www.facebook.com/GetYourGuide>  
> <https://twitter.com/GetYourGuide>  
> <https://www.instagram.com/getyourguide/>  
> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/getyourguide-ag>  
> <http://www.getyourguide.com>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

Reply via email to