+1 for feature. Strong preference for storing it in the log table, rather
than in the task instance.



On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 10:22 AM Tomasz Urbaszek <[email protected]>
wrote:

> +1, I know a customer who was requesting it too
>
> On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 6:52 PM Kaxil Naik <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 5:48 PM Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 6:42 PM 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
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Jarek Potiuk
>>> Polidea <https://www.polidea.com/> | Principal Software Engineer
>>>
>>> M: +48 660 796 129 <+48660796129>
>>> [image: Polidea] <https://www.polidea.com/>
>>>
>>>

Reply via email to