I actually did manage to take a look, thanks for the work. I am +1 on the poll-based approach -- left a comment on the push-based: I am not sure of why we need a function since create asset event API endpoint should have all info needed for what the Asset was.
On Thu, 1 Aug 2024 at 01:14, Kaxil Naik <kaxiln...@gmail.com> wrote: > 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 >> >>
