Thanks Vincent, I will take a look again tomorrow. On Tue, 30 Jul 2024 at 18:47, Vincent Beck <vincb...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi everyone, > > I updated the AIP-82 given the different comments and concerns I received. > I also tried to reply to all comments individually. I would really > appreciate if you can do a second pass and let me know what you think. > Overall, this is what I changed in the AIP: > > - Push based event-driven scheduling. I updated this section entirely > because I received many concerns about the previous proposal. The overall > idea now is to leverage the create asset event API endpoint to send > notifications from external (e.g. cloud provider) to Airflow environment. > > - I updated the poll based event-driven scheduling DAG author experience > to use a message queue scenario. I understood that this is probably the > main use case we are trying to cover with this AIP, thus I used it as > example and mentioned it multiple times across the AIP. > > Thanks again for your time :) > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/AIRFLOW/AIP-82+External+event+driven+scheduling+in+Airflow > > Vincent > > On 2024/07/29 15:58:23 Vincent Beck wrote: > > Thanks a lot all for the comments, this is very much appreciated! I > received many comments from this thread and in confluence, thanks again. > I'll try to address them all in the AIP and will send an email in this > thread once done. I will most likely revisit the push-based approach given > the number of concerns I received, thanks Jarek for proposing another > solution, I'll probably go down that path. > > > > One follow-up question Vikram. > > > > > The bespoke triggerer approach completely makes sense for the long > tail here, but can we do better for the 20% of scenarios which cover well > over 80% of usage here is the question in my mind. Or, are you thinking of > those as being covered in the "push" model? > > > > Could you share more details about what is this "20% of scenarios which > cover well over 80% of usage" please? > > > > Vincent > > > > On 2024/07/29 15:37:50 Kaxil Naik wrote: > > > Thanks Vincent for driving these, I have added my comments to the AIP > too. > > > > > > Regards, > > > Kaxil > > > > > > On Fri, 26 Jul 2024 at 20:16, Scheffler Jens (XC-AS/EAE-ADA-T) > > > <jens.scheff...@de.bosch.com.invalid> wrote: > > > > > > > +1 on the comments of Vikram and Jarek, added main points on > confluence > > > > > > > > Sent from Outlook for iOS<https://aka.ms/o0ukef> > > > > ________________________________ > > > > From: Vikram Koka <vik...@astronomer.io.INVALID> > > > > Sent: Friday, July 26, 2024 8:46:55 PM > > > > To: dev@airflow.apache.org <dev@airflow.apache.org> > > > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] External event driven scheduling in Airflow > > > > > > > > Vincent, > > > > > > > > Thanks for writing this up. The overview looks really good! > > > > > > > > I will leave my comments in the AIP as well, but at a high level > they are > > > > both relatively focused on the "how", rather than the "what". > > > > With respect to the pull / polling approach, I completely agree that > some > > > > incarnation of this is needed. > > > > I am less certain as to how on this part. The bespoke triggerer > approach > > > > completely makes sense for the long tail here, but can we do better > for the > > > > 20% of scenarios which cover well over 80% of usage here is the > question in > > > > my mind. Or, are you thinking of those as being covered in the "push" > > > > model? > > > > > > > > Which leads to the "push" model approach. > > > > I am struggling with the same question that Jarek raised here about > whether > > > > we need a new Airflow entity over and beyond the existing REST API > for the > > > > same. > > > > I am concerned about this becoming a vector of attack on Airflow. > > > > I see that this is a hot topic of discussion in the Confluence doc > as well, > > > > but wanted to summarize here as well, so it didn't get lost in the > threads > > > > of comments. > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > Vikram > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 26, 2024 at 5:16 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Thanks Vincent. I took a look and I have a general comment. I > > > > > strongly think external driven scheduling is really needed - > especially, > > > > it > > > > > should be much easier for a user to "plug-in" such an external > event to > > > > > Airflow. And there are two parts of it - as correctly stated there > - pull > > > > > and push. > > > > > > > > > > For the pull - I think it would be great to have a kind of > specialized > > > > > Triggers that will be started when DAG is parsed - and those > Triggers > > > > could > > > > > generate the events for DAGs. I think basically that's all that is > > > > needed, > > > > > for example I imagine a pubsub trigger that will subscribe to > messages > > > > > coming on the pubsub queue and fire "Asset" event when a message is > > > > > received. Not much controversy there - I am not sure about the > polling > > > > > thing , because I've always believed that when "asyncio-native" > Trigger > > > > is > > > > > run in the asyncio event loop, we do not "poll" every second or so > (but > > > > > maybe this is just coming from some specific triggers that > actually do > > > > > such regular poll. But yes - there are polls like running select > on the > > > > DB > > > > > that cannot be easily "async-ed" so having a configurable polling > time > > > > > would be good there (but I am not sure maybe it's even possible > today). I > > > > > think this would be really great if we have that option, because > it makes > > > > > it much easier to set up the authorization for Airlfow users - > rather > > > > than > > > > > setting up authorization and REST calls coming from an external > system, > > > > we > > > > > can utilize Connections of Airlfow to authorize such a Trigger to > > > > subscribe > > > > > to events. > > > > > > > > > > For the push proposal - as I read the proposal, the main point > behind it > > > > > is rather than users having to write "Airflow" way of triggering > events > > > > and > > > > > configuring authentication (using REST API) to generate asset > events, is > > > > to > > > > > make Airflow natively understand external ways of pushing - and > > > > effectively > > > > > authorizing and mapping such incoming unauthorized requests into > event > > > > that > > > > > could be generated by an API REST call. > > > > > I am not really sure honestly if this is something that we want as > > > > > "running" in airlfow as an endpoint. I'd say such an unauthorised > > > > endpoint > > > > > is probably not a good idea - for a variety of reasons, mostly > security. > > > > > And as I understand the goal is that users can easily point at > > > > "3rd-party" > > > > > notification to Airflow and get the event generated. > > > > > > > > > > My feeling is that while this is needed - it should be > externalised from > > > > > airlfow webserver. The authorization has to be set up anyway > > > > additionally - > > > > > unlike in "poll" case - we cannot use Connections for authorizing > > > > (because > > > > > it's not Airlfow that authorizes in an external system - it's the > other > > > > way > > > > > round). So we have to anyhow setup "something extra" in Airflow to > > > > > authorize the external system. Which could be what we have now - > user > > > > that > > > > > allows us to trigger the event. Which means that our REST API could > > > > > potentially be used the same way it is now, but we will need > "something" > > > > > (library, lambda function etc.) that users could easily setup in > the > > > > > external system to map whatever trigger they generate natively > (say S3 > > > > file > > > > > created) to Airflow REST API. > > > > > > > > > > As I see it - this is quite often used (and very practical, that > you > > > > deploy > > > > > a cloud function or lambda that subscribes on the event received > when > > > > > S3/GCS is created. So it would be on the user to deploy such a > lambda - > > > > but > > > > > we **could** provide a library of those: say s3 lambda, gcp cloud > > > > function > > > > > in respective providers - with documentation how to set them up, > and how > > > > to > > > > > configure authorization and we would be generally "done". I am > just not > > > > > sure if we need a new entity in Airflow for that (Event receiver). > It > > > > feels > > > > > like it asks Airflow to take more responsibility, when we all > think on > > > > what > > > > > to "remove" from Airflow rather than "add" to it - especially when > it > > > > comes > > > > > to external integrations. It feels to me that Airflow should make > it easy > > > > > to be triggered by such an external system and make it easy to > "map" to > > > > the > > > > > way we expect to get events triggered, but this should be done > outside of > > > > > Airflow. If the users can easily find in our docs when they search > "what > > > > do > > > > > I do to externally trigger Airflow on S3 change": either a) > configure > > > > > polling in airflow using s3 Connection, or b) "create a user + > deploy > > > > this > > > > > lambda with those parameters" - that is "easy enough" and very > practical > > > > > as well. > > > > > > > > > > But maybe I am not seeing the whole picture and the real problem > it's > > > > > solving - so take it as a "first review pass" and "guts feeling". > > > > > > > > > > J. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 25, 2024 at 10:55 PM Beck, Vincent > > > > <vincb...@amazon.com.invalid > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hello everyone, > > > > > > > > > > > > I created a draft AIP regarding "External event driven > scheduling in > > > > > > Airflow". This proposal is about adding capability in Airflow to > > > > schedule > > > > > > DAGs based on external events. Here are some examples of such > external > > > > > > events: > > > > > > - A user signs up to one of the user pool defined in my cloud > provider > > > > > > - One of the databases used in my company has been updated > > > > > > - A job in my cloud provider has been executed successfully > > > > > > > > > > > > The intent of this AIP is to leverage datasets (which will be > soon > > > > > assets) > > > > > > and update them based on external events. I would like to > propose this > > > > > AIP > > > > > > for discussion and more importantly, hear some feedbacks from > you :) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcwiki.apache.org%2Fconfluence%2Fdisplay%2FAIRFLOW%2FAIP-82%2BExternal%2Bevent%2Bdriven%2Bscheduling%2Bin%2BAirflow&data=05%7C02%7CJens.Scheffler%40de.bosch.com%7C9e55ef9af31e4a669ef108dcada3a726%7C0ae51e1907c84e4bbb6d648ee58410f4%7C0%7C0%7C638576165598178951%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=3FFvhCI6RA6sPhZoiOBAqzgyTkC6NNYqJYjBRVqEmUY%3D&reserved=0 > > > > < > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/AIRFLOW/AIP-82+External+event+driven+scheduling+in+Airflow > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vincent > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@airflow.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@airflow.apache.org > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@airflow.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@airflow.apache.org > >
