Hello Vikram, Thank you for your reply.
To be clear, no I'm not deprecating deferrable operators, it just depends on what the operator does: 1. If the operator is deferrable because it needs to use an async hook to retrieve huge payloads from a paginated API, then yes, I would prefer the async operator over the deferred one, like for example the MSGraphAsyncOperator or the HttpOperator. The reason why is what was also explained in the devlist discussion before, you're literally overloading the triggers (in memory) and the Airflow metadatabase (triggers table) with huge payloads, something triggers are not designed for (but you could) as triggers don't have like an XCom backend which you can easily replace with another one, so you're stuck with storing the payloads (trigger events) in the Airflow database table. 2. If the operator is deferrable because it needs to do polling to determine it succeeded or not, then yes, it makes sense, for example I just started a PR (https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/60651) to fix an issue related to polling in the WinRMOperator which blocks the worker for no reason as it just awaits an answer, it's similar to point one but here the payload in the triggers is small and so is the execution time. So yes, in some cases I would advocate to use the BaseAsyncOperator, but in other cases not, it all depends on the responsibility of the operator and what you're doing with. AIP-98 also opens the door to implement the IterableOperator in the future which was also discussed mostly with Jarek in the devlist (https://lists.apache.org/thread/ztnfsqolow4v1zsv4pkpnxc1fk0hbf2p ) as he knows what the idea behind there is, but that's also still work in progress. On the other hand deferrable operators also have a huge advantage as they rely on triggers and that is that it allows us to implement the "streaming" mechanism or the lazy dynamic task mapping expansion I explained in AIP-88 (https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=334760511 ) and which I presented on the Summit in Seattle last year. Once PR #55068 (https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/55068/) is merged, I will continue working on that one as well. So yes, it all depends on the use case. I hope this makes it a bit more clear to you. David -----Original Message----- From: Vikram Koka via dev <[email protected]> Sent: 16 January 2026 19:58 To: [email protected] Cc: Vikram Koka <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [VOTE] AIP-98: Add async support for PythonOperator in Airflow 3 EXTERNAL MAIL: Indien je de afzender van deze e-mail niet kent en deze niet vertrouwt, klik niet op een link of open geen bijlages. Bij twijfel, stuur deze e-mail als bijlage naar [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>. Hey David, Just read the AIP and posted questions on the Confluence page as well. I find this very interesting and am *overall supportive*, but I have several questions about usage and user / developer guidance. Specifically around what we should be recommending around what user situations. I put the following question in the confluence page as well: - You are making a strong case for supporting async within the PythonOperator pattern over Deferrable Operators. - What I am missing is when should users be using Deferrable Operators instead? - Also, are you advocating deprecating Deferrable Operators entirely? I am not opposed to it, but definitely something I am curious about your viewpoint here. Until then, I would vote -0.5 (binding) I am absolutely willing and intend to change my vote, just want to get questions answered first is all. These are questions which any user would have and I therefore believe it is important to address as part of making and merging this change. Vikram On Fri, Jan 16, 2026 at 9:14 AM Dheeraj Turaga <[email protected]> wrote: > +1 (binding) > > Sriraj Dheeraj Turaga > > On Fri, Jan 16, 2026 at 9:19 AM Shahar Epstein <[email protected]> wrote: > > > +1 (binding) > > > > On Fri, Jan 16, 2026 at 3:39 PM Blain David > > <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > Hi Everyone, > > > > > > > > > > > > I would like to be calling a vote on this AIP: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcwik > i.apache.org%2Fconfluence%2Fdisplay%2FAIRFLOW%2FAIP-98%253A%2BAdd%2Bas > ync%2Bsupport%2Bfor%2BPythonOperator%2Bin%2BAirflow%2B3&data=05%7C02%7 > Cdavid.blain%40infrabel.be%7C56d6ae2f0e904b8c30d608de55315684%7Cb82bc3 > 14ab8e4d6fb18946f02e1f27f2%7C0%7C0%7C639041867613554992%7CUnknown%7CTW > FpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIs > IkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=IEe7gFlEP5XQwYbFMM > 8LkPw%2Bp2Yr0IuBS%2BIp1SSAr1o%3D&reserved=0 > > > > > > There was already a discussion in the devlist regarding this proposal: > > > https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2F > > > lists.apache.org%2Fthread%2Fztnfsqolow4v1zsv4pkpnxc1fk0hbf2p&data= > > > 05%7C02%7Cdavid.blain%40infrabel.be%7C56d6ae2f0e904b8c30d608de5531 > > > 5684%7Cb82bc314ab8e4d6fb18946f02e1f27f2%7C0%7C0%7C6390418676135806 > > > 65%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDA > > > wMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C > > > &sdata=ccy%2Fec1OCrAyvQorRAEvhuPMDuslWEep9fFNNiT6r7o%3D&reserved=0 > > > > > > This AIP is already implemented and merged as a PR: > > > https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2F > > > github.com%2Fapache%2Fairflow%2Fpull%2F60268&data=05%7C02%7Cdavid. > > > blain%40infrabel.be%7C56d6ae2f0e904b8c30d608de55315684%7Cb82bc314a > > > b8e4d6fb18946f02e1f27f2%7C0%7C0%7C639041867613602603%7CUnknown%7CT > > > WFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4 > > > zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=c4BiguOx6 > > > kmqIlWBlNIf6SrO4qN2baTwwFuDBaDmBX8%3D&reserved=0 > > > > > > The vote will run for 5 days and last till next thursday, the 22th > > > of > Jan > > > 2026 23:30 GMT. > > > > > > > > > > > > Everyone is encouraged to vote, although only PMC members and > Committers' > > > votes are considered binding. > > > > > > > > > > > > Please vote accordingly > > > > > > > > > > > > [ ] +1 Approve > > > > > > [ ] +0 no opinion > > > > > > [ ] -1 disapprove with the reason > > > > > > > > > > > > I hereby already vote my +1 binding :) > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > David aka dabla > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
