+1, Lyft uses the extra blob in the log table? to store UI
auditing information.

On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 9:42 AM Sumit Maheshwari <[email protected]>
wrote:

> +1 for the feature. Looking at the schema of the log table, I think it's
> perfect to store such kind of information.
>
> On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 9:55 PM Daniel Imberman <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> This could be pretty valuable for future audits. I’d personally rather
>> avoid adding fields to the DB in general. Could we store it wherever we
>> store normal failure messages?
>>
>> via Newton Mail
>> <https://cloudmagic.com/k/d/mailapp?ct=dx&cv=10.0.51&pv=10.15.6&source=email_footer_2>
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 9:21 AM, Ace Haidrey
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Hi team,
>>
>> My name is Ace, I’m a data engineer at Pinterest, and I wanted to get
>> some feedback from the community on how they’d propose designing a feature
>> that has been asked for us multiple times, that we’d like to implement
>> in-house.
>>
>> The ask is the following:
>> - Users want to be able to add an optional reason/description when they
>> click on the Mark Success/Failed for both task level in graph views or dag
>> level in tree views. This is to clearly state why the actions were taken on
>> higher priority flows for when others are stepping in to look in it.
>>
>> For us the feature makes sense to have, and I was wondering if this is
>> something the greater group would like to have upstream as well. And if so
>> then we wanted to know what was preferred.
>>
>> 1. We can add this information in the UI for the confirmation view and an
>> optional textbook to add details similar to how users can add conf
>> variables when triggering a dag option is selected in the UI.
>>
>> Then after this, storing this information is the question. Do we want to
>> store this information in the action logging extra blob and then add a view
>> in the dag view where it has actions just pertaining to this dag and its
>> tasks. (We plan to add this personally anyways for ourselves as going to
>> the big list of actions for all dags and searching is not convenient
>> always).
>>
>> Or do we want to add a new column in the task Instance model and dag run
>> model to store the descriptions and retrieve the information from there.
>>
>> Tradeoffs here include the addition of a schema change, where the new
>> column would generally be sparse, and the data is more resultant from an
>> action vs necessarily being stored as part of the task run/dag run.
>>
>> Please let me know on any feedback, concerns, ideas, and more!
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Ace
>>
>>

Reply via email to