We should just pass it the UTC date (we should never use local time except at the user interface). I’m testing a patch right now.
B. > On 30 Oct 2018, at 21:13, Ash Berlin-Taylor <a...@firemirror.com> wrote: > > I think if we give croniter a tz-aware DT in the local tz it will deal with > DST (i.e. will give 2:55 CEST followed by 2:00 CET) and then we convert it to > UTC for return - but right now we are giving it a TZ-unaware local time. > > I think. > > Ash > > On 30 October 2018 19:40:27 GMT, Bolke de Bruin <bdbr...@gmail.com> wrote: > I think we should use the UTC date for cron instead of the naive local date > time. I will check of croniter implements this so we can rely on that. > > B. > > On 28 Oct 2018, at 02:09, Bolke de Bruin <bdbr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I wonder how to treat this: > > This is what I think happens (need to verify more, but I am pretty sure) the > specified DAG should run every 5 minutes. At DST change (3AM -> 2AM) we > basically hit a schedule that we have already seen. 2AM -> 3AM has already > happened. Obviously the intention is to run every 5 minutes. But what do we > do with the execution_date? Is this still idempotent? Should we indeed > reschedule? > > B. > > On 30 Oct 2018, at 19:01, Ash Berlin-Taylor <a...@apache.org> wrote: > > I've done a bit more digging - the issue is of our tz-aware handling inside > following_schedule (and previous schedule) - causing it to loop. > > This section of the croniter docs seems relevant > https://github.com/kiorky/croniter#about-dst > <https://github.com/kiorky/croniter#about-dst> > > Be sure to init your croniter instance with a TZ aware datetime for this to > work !: > local_date = tz.localize(datetime(2017, 3, 26)) > val = croniter('0 0 * * *', local_date).get_next(datetime) > > I think the problem is that we are _not_ passing a TZ aware dag in and we > should be. > > On 30 Oct 2018, at 17:35, Bolke de Bruin <bdbr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Oh that’s a great environment to start digging. Thanks. I’ll have a look. > > B. > > Verstuurd vanaf mijn iPad > > Op 30 okt. 2018 om 18:25 heeft Ash Berlin-Taylor <a...@apache.org> het > volgende geschreven: > > This line in airflow.jobs (line 874 in my checkout) is causing the loop: > > last_run = dag.get_last_dagrun(session=session) > if last_run and next_run_date: > while next_run_date <= last_run.execution_date: > next_run_date = dag.following_schedule(next_run_date) > > > > On 30 Oct 2018, at 17:20, Ash Berlin-Taylor <a...@apache.org> wrote: > > Hi, kaczors on gitter has produced a minmal reproduction case: > https://github.com/kaczors/airflow_1_10_tz_bug > <https://github.com/kaczors/airflow_1_10_tz_bug> > > Rough repro steps: In a VM, with time syncing disabled, and configured with > system timezone of Europe/Zurich (or any other CEST one) run > > - `date 10280250.00` > - initdb, start scheduler, webserver, enable dag etc. > - `date 10280259.00` > - wait 5-10 mins for scheduler to catch up > - After the on-the-hour task run the scheduler will spin up another process > to parse the dag... and it never returns. > > I've only just managed to reproduce it, so haven't dug in to why yet. A quick > hacky debug print shows something is stuck in an infinite loop. > > -ash > > On 29 Oct 2018, at 17:59, Bolke de Bruin <bdbr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Can this be confirmed? Then I can have a look at it. Preferably with dag > definition code. > > On the licensing requirements: > > 1. Indeed licensing header for markdown documents. It was suggested to use > html comments. I’m not sure how that renders with others like PDF though. > 2. The licensing notifications need to be tied to a specific version as > licenses might change with versions. > > Cheers > Bolke > > Verstuurd vanaf mijn iPad > > Op 29 okt. 2018 om 12:39 heeft Ash Berlin-Taylor <a...@apache.org> het > volgende geschreven: > > I was going to make a start on the release, but two people have reported that > there might be an issue around non-UTC dags and the scheduler changing over > from Summer time. > > 08:45 Emmanuel> Hi there, we are currently experiencing a very strange issue > : we have hourly DAGs with a start_date in a local timezone (not UTC) and > since (Sunday) the last winter time change they don’t run anymore. Any idea ? > 09:41 <Emmanuel> it impacted all our DAG that had a run at 3am > (Europe/Paris), the exact time of winter time change :( > > I am going to take a look at this today and see if I can get to the bottom of > it. > > Bolke: are there any outstanding tasks/issues that you know of that might > slow down the vote for a 1.10.1? (i.e. did we sort of out all the licensing > issues that were asked of us? I thought I read something about license > declarations in markdown files?) > > -ash > > On 28 Oct 2018, at 14:46, Bolke de Bruin <bdbr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I agree with that, but I would favor time based releases instead. We are > again at the point that a release takes so much time that the gap is getting > really big again. @ash why not start releasing now and move the remainder to > 1.10.2? I dont think there are real blockers (although we might find them). > > > On 28 Oct 2018, at 15:35, airflowuser <airflowu...@protonmail.com.INVALID> > wrote: > > I was really hoping that > https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/pull/4069 > <https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/pull/4069> will be merged into > 1.10.1 > Deleting dags was a highly requested feature for 1.10 - this can fix the > problem with it. > > > ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ > On Friday, October 26, 2018 6:12 PM, Bolke de Bruin <bdbr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hey Ash, > > I was wondering if you are picking up the 1.10.1 release? Master is speeding > ahead and you were tracking fixes for 1.10.1 right? > > B. > > > > > > > > -- > Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
