I think what I observed was doesn't every time otherwise we would see it
every time. I'll see if it happens this night again.

On Sat, Feb 25, 2017 at 1:24 PM Jeremiah Lowin <[email protected]> wrote:

> Interesting if this is related to what I was seeing -- but to be clear the
> error I observed is non-deterministic and doesn't happen every time
> (obviously, because otherwise there would be no passing Travis runs). Is
> that the case for what you're describing, Dan/Alex?
>
> On Sat, Feb 25, 2017 at 4:13 AM Alex Van Boxel <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> About:  Skipped tasks potentially cause a dagrun to be marked
> failure/success prematurely. Isn't that related to the discussion I had
> with Max about the ONE_SUCCESS trigger? When skipping tasks for now you
> need to put ONE_SUCCESS. I had kind of a fix but it was rejected because it
> changed behaviour.
>
> On Sat, Feb 25, 2017 at 9:19 AM Bolke de Bruin <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Not trying to muddy the waters, but the observation of Jeremiah (non
> > deterministic outcomes) might have to do something with #3. I didn’t dive
> > in deeper, yet.
> >
> > ======================================================================
> > ERROR: test_backfill_examples (tests.BackfillJobTest)
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Traceback (most recent call last):
> >   File "/home/travis/build/apache/incubator-airflow/tests/jobs.py", line
> > 164, in test_backfill_examples
> >     job.run()
> >   File "/home/travis/build/apache/incubator-airflow/airflow/jobs.py",
> line
> > 200, in run
> >     self._execute()
> >   File "/home/travis/build/apache/incubator-airflow/airflow/jobs.py",
> line
> > 1999, in _execute
> >     raise AirflowException(err)
> > AirflowException: ---------------------------------------------------
> > Some task instances failed:
> > set([('example_short_circuit_operator', 'condition_is_True',
> > datetime.datetime(2016, 1, 1, 0, 0))])
> > https://s3.amazonaws.com/archive.travis-ci.org/jobs/204780706/log.txt <
> > https://s3.amazonaws.com/archive.travis-ci.org/jobs/204780706/log.txt>
> >
> > Bolke
> >
> > > On 25 Feb 2017, at 09:07, Bolke de Bruin <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Dan,
> > >
> > > - Backfill indeed runs only one dagrun at the time, see line 1755 of
> > jobs.py. I’ll think about how to fix this over the weekend (I think it
> was
> > my change that introduced this). Suggestions always welcome. Depending
> the
> > impact it is a blocker or not. We don’t often use backfills and
> definitely
> > not at your size, so that is why it didn’t pop up with us. I’m assuming
> > blocker for now, btw.
> > > - Speculation on the High DB Load. I’m not sure what your benchmark is
> > here (1.7.1 + multi processor dags?), but as you mentioned in the code
> > dependencies are checked a couple of times for one run and even task
> > instance. Dependency checking requires aggregation on the DB, which is a
> > performance killer. Annoying but not a blocker.
> > > - Skipped tasks potentially cause a dagrun to be marked failure/success
> > prematurely. BranchOperators are widely used if it affects these
> operators,
> > then it is a blocker.
> > >
> > > - Bolke
> > >
> > >> On 25 Feb 2017, at 02:04, Dan Davydov <[email protected]
> .INVALID>
> > wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Update on old pending issues:
> > >> - Black Squares in UI: Fix merged
> > >> - Double Trigger Issue That Alex G Mentioned: Alex has a PR in flight
> > >>
> > >> New Issues:
> > >> - Backfill seems to be having issues (only running one dagrun at a
> > time),
> > >> we are still investigating - might be a blocker
> > >> - High DB Load (~8x more than 1.7) - We are still investigating but
> it's
> > >> probably not a blocker for the release
> > >> - Skipped tasks potentially cause a dagrun to be marked as
> > failure/success
> > >> prematurely - not sure whether or not to classify this as a blocker
> > (only
> > >> really an issue for users who use the BranchingPythonOperator, which
> > AirBnB
> > >> does)
> > >>
> > >> On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 5:59 PM, siddharth anand <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> IMHO, a DAG run without a start date is non-sensical but is not
> > enforced
> > >>> That said, our UI allows for the manual creation of DAG Runs without
> a
> > >>> start date as shown in the images below:
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>  - https://www.dropbox.com/s/3sxcqh04eztpl7p/Screenshot%
> > >>>  202017-02-22%2016.00.40.png?dl=0
> > >>>  <https://www.dropbox.com/s/3sxcqh04eztpl7p/Screenshot%
> > >>> 202017-02-22%2016.00.40.png?dl=0>
> > >>>  - https://www.dropbox.com/s/4q6rr9dwghag1yy/Screenshot%
> > >>>  202017-02-22%2016.02.22.png?dl=0
> > >>>  <https://www.dropbox.com/s/4q6rr9dwghag1yy/Screenshot%
> > >>> 202017-02-22%2016.02.22.png?dl=0>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 2:26 PM, Maxime Beauchemin <
> > >>> [email protected]> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> Our database may have edge cases that could be associated with
> running
> > >>> any
> > >>>> previous version that may or may not have been part of an official
> > >>> release.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Let's see if anyone else reports the issue. If no one does, one
> > option is
> > >>>> to release 1.8.0 as is with a comment in the release notes, and have
> a
> > >>>> future official minor apache release 1.8.1 that would fix these
> minor
> > >>>> issues that are not deal breaker.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> @bolke, I'm curious, how long does it take you to go through one
> > release
> > >>>> cycle? Oh, and do you have a documented step by step process for
> > >>> releasing?
> > >>>> I'd like to add the Pypi part to this doc and add committers that
> are
> > >>>> interested to have rights on the project on Pypi.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Max
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 2:00 PM, Bolke de Bruin <[email protected]>
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> So it is a database integrity issue? Afaik a start_date should
> always
> > >>> be
> > >>>>> set for a DagRun (create_dagrun) does so  I didn't check the code
> > >>> though.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Sent from my iPhone
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> On 22 Feb 2017, at 22:19, Dan Davydov <[email protected].
> > >>> INVALID>
> > >>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Should clarify this occurs when a dagrun does not have a start
> date,
> > >>>> not
> > >>>>> a
> > >>>>>> dag (which makes it even less likely to happen). I don't think
> this
> > >>> is
> > >>>> a
> > >>>>>> blocker for releasing.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 1:15 PM, Dan Davydov <
> > >>> [email protected]>
> > >>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> I rolled this out in our prod and the webservers failed to load
> due
> > >>> to
> > >>>>>>> this commit:
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-510] Filter Paused Dags, show Last Run & Trigger Dag
> > >>>>>>> 7c94d81c390881643f94d5e3d7d6fb351a445b72
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> This fixed it:
> > >>>>>>> -                            </a> <span id="statuses_info"
> > >>>>>>> class="glyphicon glyphicon-info-sign" aria-hidden="true"
> > >>> title="Start
> > >>>>> Date:
> > >>>>>>> {{last_run.start_date.strftime('%Y-%m-%d %H:%M')}}"></span>
> > >>>>>>> +                            </a> <span id="statuses_info"
> > >>>>>>> class="glyphicon glyphicon-info-sign" aria-hidden="true"></span>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> This is caused by assuming that all DAGs have start dates set, so
> a
> > >>>>> broken
> > >>>>>>> DAG will take down the whole UI. Not sure if we want to make this
> a
> > >>>>> blocker
> > >>>>>>> for the release or not, I'm guessing for most deployments this
> > would
> > >>>>> occur
> > >>>>>>> pretty rarely. I'll submit a PR to fix it soon.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 9:49 AM, Chris Riccomini <
> > >>>> [email protected]
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Ack that the vote has already passed, but belated +1 (binding)
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 7:42 AM, Bolke de Bruin <
> > [email protected]
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> IPMC Voting can be found here:
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/
> > >>>>>>>> 201702.mbox/%
> > >>>>>>>>> [email protected]%3e <
> > >>>>>>>>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/
> > >>>>>>>> 201702.mbox/%
> > >>>>>>>>> [email protected]%3E>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> Kind regards,
> > >>>>>>>>> Bolke
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> On 21 Feb 2017, at 08:20, Bolke de Bruin <[email protected]>
> > >>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> Hello,
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> Apache Airflow (incubating) 1.8.0 (based on RC4) has been
> > >>> accepted.
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> 9 “+1” votes received:
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> - Maxime Beauchemin (binding)
> > >>>>>>>>>> - Arthur Wiedmer (binding)
> > >>>>>>>>>> - Dan Davydov (binding)
> > >>>>>>>>>> - Jeremiah Lowin (binding)
> > >>>>>>>>>> - Siddharth Anand (binding)
> > >>>>>>>>>> - Alex van Boxel (binding)
> > >>>>>>>>>> - Bolke de Bruin (binding)
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> - Jayesh Senjaliya (non-binding)
> > >>>>>>>>>> - Yi (non-binding)
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> Vote thread (start):
> > >>>>>>>>>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-
> > >>>>>>>>> airflow-dev/201702.mbox/%3cD360D9BE-C358-42A1-9188-
> > >>>>>>>>> [email protected]%3e <http://mail-archives.apache.
> > >>>>>>>>> org/mod_mbox/incubator-airflow-dev/201702.mbox/%3C7EB7B6D6-
> > >>>>>>>> 092E-48D2-AA0F-
> > >>>>>>>>> [email protected]%3E>
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> Next steps:
> > >>>>>>>>>> 1) will start the voting process at the IPMC mailinglist. I do
> > >>>> expect
> > >>>>>>>>> some changes to be required mostly in documentation maybe a
> > >>> license
> > >>>>> here
> > >>>>>>>>> and there. So, we might end up with changes to stable. As long
> as
> > >>>>> these
> > >>>>>>>> are
> > >>>>>>>>> not (significant) code changes I will not re-raise the vote.
> > >>>>>>>>>> 2) Only after the positive voting on the IPMC and finalisation
> I
> > >>>> will
> > >>>>>>>>> rebrand the RC to Release.
> > >>>>>>>>>> 3) I will upload it to the incubator release page, then the
> tar
> > >>>> ball
> > >>>>>>>>> needs to propagate to the mirrors.
> > >>>>>>>>>> 4) Update the website (can someone volunteer please?)
> > >>>>>>>>>> 5) Finally, I will ask Maxime to upload it to pypi. It seems
> we
> > >>> can
> > >>>>>>>> keep
> > >>>>>>>>> the apache branding as lib cloud is doing this as well (
> > >>>>>>>>> https://libcloud.apache.org/downloads.html#pypi-package <
> > >>>>>>>>> https://libcloud.apache.org/downloads.html#pypi-package>).
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> Jippie!
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> Bolke
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >
> >
> > --
>   _/
> _/ Alex Van Boxel
>
-- 
  _/
_/ Alex Van Boxel

Reply via email to