Great, Thanks kaxil.

Pavan

On Sat, May 10, 2025, 02:52 Aritra Basu <aritrabasu1...@gmail.com> wrote:

> 🙌 Woohoo!
> --
> Regards,
> Aritra Basu
>
> On Sat, 10 May 2025, 4:20 am Vikram Koka, <vik...@astronomer.io.invalid>
> wrote:
>
> > Oh, excellent work!
> > Excited to see this working.
> >
> > Thank you,
> > Vikram
> >
> > On Fri, May 9, 2025 at 2:24 PM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Woohoooo
> > >
> > > On Fri, May 9, 2025 at 10:42 PM Daniel Standish
> > > <daniel.stand...@astronomer.io.invalid> wrote:
> > >
> > > > great!
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, May 9, 2025 at 12:54 PM Kaxil Naik <kaxiln...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hey all,
> > > > >
> > > > > I am happy to share that `dag.test` has now been ported over to use
> > the
> > > > > Task SDK execution path as part of
> > > > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/50300 .
> > > > >
> > > > > This change eliminates one of the last remaining places in Airflow
> > that
> > > > > still relied on the old execution flow from Airflow 2.x, which
> > > permitted
> > > > > direct database access during task runs. With this update, dag.test
> > now
> > > > > mirrors the same execution logic as production tasks, offering
> > > > consistency
> > > > > between test and runtime behavior.
> > > > >
> > > > > This is one of the last few things that were not using the "actual"
> > > Task
> > > > > Execution path and instead used the old Airflow 2 execution path
> that
> > > > > allowed DB access.
> > > > >
> > > > > *Note*: If you were relying on `dag.test` for system tests or local
> > > > > development that accessed the database directly, those patterns
> will
> > no
> > > > > longer work. This is intentional; direct DB access is not part of
> the
> > > > > supported execution model anymore.
> > > > >
> > > > > Please let me know if there are any teething issues that arise
> > because
> > > of
> > > > > that. There are just a few things left before we can completely
> > remove
> > > > the
> > > > > old execution path, and I am excited about that.
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > > Kaxil
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to