Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Delivered-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Received: from cust-asf.ponee.io (cust-asf.ponee.io [163.172.22.183]) by cust-asf2.ponee.io (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E819200D2B for ; Thu, 2 Nov 2017 15:30:04 +0100 (CET) Received: by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) id 2AC03160BE5; Thu, 2 Nov 2017 14:30:04 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id 733491609EE for ; Thu, 2 Nov 2017 15:30:03 +0100 (CET) Received: (qmail 55882 invoked by uid 500); 2 Nov 2017 14:30:02 -0000 Mailing-List: contact commits-help@airflow.incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@airflow.incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list commits@airflow.incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 55873 invoked by uid 99); 2 Nov 2017 14:30:02 -0000 Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd1-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 02 Nov 2017 14:30:02 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd1-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd1-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id E97F3D90E0 for ; Thu, 2 Nov 2017 14:30:01 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd1-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -100.002 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-100.002 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=disabled Received: from mx1-lw-us.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd1-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.7]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VVYuNllre5yn for ; Thu, 2 Nov 2017 14:30:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mailrelay1-us-west.apache.org (mailrelay1-us-west.apache.org [209.188.14.139]) by mx1-lw-us.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-lw-us.apache.org) with ESMTP id 23D6C5F6CD for ; Thu, 2 Nov 2017 14:30:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from jira-lw-us.apache.org (unknown [207.244.88.139]) by mailrelay1-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mailrelay1-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id A54A3E059C for ; Thu, 2 Nov 2017 14:30:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from jira-lw-us.apache.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by jira-lw-us.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at jira-lw-us.apache.org) with ESMTP id 3600E23F05 for ; Thu, 2 Nov 2017 14:30:00 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2017 14:30:00 +0000 (UTC) From: "Alessio Palma (JIRA)" To: commits@airflow.incubator.apache.org Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Subject: [jira] [Created] (AIRFLOW-1778) Task_instance and Dag_run recycle MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-JIRA-FingerPrint: 30527f35849b9dde25b450d4833f0394 archived-at: Thu, 02 Nov 2017 14:30:04 -0000 Alessio Palma created AIRFLOW-1778: -------------------------------------- Summary: Task_instance and Dag_run recycle Key: AIRFLOW-1778 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AIRFLOW-1778 Project: Apache Airflow Issue Type: Wish Components: DagRun Affects Versions: 1.8.1 Reporter: Alessio Palma Hello, I'm not sure this is a real issue but something strange happened on our airflow installation. We started a dag which did not complete due to some issues on Hadoop, so we delete all the dag_run affected and left untouched the task_instances waited for it to complete but... 1. Every dag restarted with the correct execution date 2. No processor executed for real 3. airflow used the old task_instance record. So the question is... it was so bad just to delete the dag_run without deleting the task_instances? Also... If it is bad to delete the dag_run, why it is possible to execute this action from the admin menu? Should the delete dag_run option to be removed? -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.4.14#64029)