I'm too in favor of moving Dask Executor into its own provider, which will
make the airflow's codebase more pluggable and orthogonal. Big +1 :)

Thanks,
Utkarsh Sharma

On Fri, Jul 14, 2023 at 2:03 AM Ferruzzi, Dennis
<ferru...@amazon.com.invalid> wrote:

> I'm not sure how much of a train wreck it would turn into, but moving Dask
> Executor to a provider seems logical to me.
>
> Maybe in the far-flung future of Airflow 3.0 we could move celery and k8s
> into their own as well and make it truly pluggable and executor-agnostic,
> but I agree that at this time they are too deeply integrated.
>
>
>  - ferruzzi
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Oliveira, Niko <oniko...@amazon.com.INVALID>
> Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2023 10:40 AM
> To: dev@airflow.apache.org
> Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL][DISCUSS] Moving Dask Executor to a separate
> (optional?) dask provider
>
> CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not
> click links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender and know
> the content is safe.
>
>
>
> I think in a perfect world we'd only have the completely vendor neutral
> executors pre-installed (Local, Sequential, Debug) and anything else would
> need to be specifically installed by admins/users. I think if we were
> starting from scratch this would make the most sense, but clearly
> Kubernetes and Celery executors are so ubiquitous that it'd cause too much
> wreckage to not install them, but I'd like to push for Dask to _not_ be
> installed by default. If this causes too much wreckage then perhaps we
> should deprecate that (though I'm not sure exactly what that would look
> like in this context), but it's difficult to measure how many folks are
> using the Dask executor. Perhaps we have data from the yearly
> questionnaire/survey we send?
>
> ________________________________
> From: Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2023 8:05:54 AM
> To: dev@airflow.apache.org
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] [DISCUSS] Moving Dask Executor to a separate
> (optional?) dask provider
>
> CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not
> click links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender and know
> the content is safe.
>
>
>
> Hello Everyone,
>
> A small follow up after K8S/Celery executors being moved:
> https://lists.apache.org/thread/7gyw7ty9vm0pokjxq7y3b1zw6mrlxfm8
>
> We are in the process of moving Celery / Kubernetes executor (Celery almost
> complete and I am working on K8S next + some common discovery and config
> moving)
>
> But there is one more "questionable" executor - i.e. Dask executor, still
> living in Airflow Core.
>
> When it comes to Celery/Kubernetes, we decided to make the two providers
> preinstalled, because it makes most sense  - we are also going to get the
> basic documentation in the "core" airflow documentation so that it is
> easier discoverable and prominently visible - also because of the
> vendor-neutrality.
>
> However when it comes to Dask I am not sure about its status and whether we
> should make it preinstalled ?
>
> I guess there is no doubt to move it to a provider - this has only the
> benefits same as Celery/K8S move. But whether it should be preinstalled
> with Airflow - I am not sure. I do not know how frequently Dask executor
> (and Dask) is used by people using Airflow, but I personally do not think
> it should be as "closely" connected with Airflow as Celery/Kubernetes ones.
>
> If we do not make it preinstalled, it is somewhat (but not too much,
> really) breaking change. We still might choose to install dask provider in
> the PROD reference image, so it will continue to work if you use the image,
> and when you are installing airflow in venv you will only have to specify
> `pip install apache-airflow[dask]` or manually install
> `apache-airflow-providers-daskexecutor` (for now at least this is the name
> I could reserve in PyPI). So this is not really breaking, it just requires
> another dependency to be installed. But some pipelines of installing
> Airflow might get broken because it won't be pre-installed - so this is a
> borderline breaking.
>
> WDYT? Should we make the dask executor pre-installed or not?
>
> J.
>

Reply via email to