airflow-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Bolke de Bruin <>
Subject Re: Discussion on Airflow 1.8.1 RC2
Date Thu, 04 May 2017 19:59:34 GMT
Gotcha. I can relate to that. With hindsight the backfill change should not have made it into
the RC cycle. Any way I hope you guys can jump on the wagon pretty soon again: I do think
1.8.1 is in a lot better shape than 1.8.0. It would be nice if you guys could take on 1.8.2.

And as mentioned if it has to do with “backfill” for the moment I feel my name is tagged
on that.

- Bolke

> On 4 May 2017, at 21:27, Dan Davydov <> wrote:
> Thinking back it may have been 1.8.0rc5-> 1.8.0 regressions. I am still worried about
the large number of PRs in 1.8.1 even if they are all bug fixes though (known issues that
we already have patches for vs unknown new issues introduced with the 1.8.1 patches) , but
I agree with your sentiment that these PRs should most likely make things more stable.
> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 10:55 AM, Alex Guziel < <>>
> I don't think any of the fixes I did were regressions.
> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 8:11 AM, Bolke de Bruin < <>>
> I know of one that Alex wanted to get in, but wasn’t targeted for 1.8.1 in Jira and
thus didn’t make the cut at RC time. There is is another one out that seems to have stalled
a bit ( <>).
> Reading the changelog of 1.8.1 I see bug fixes, apache requirements and one “new”
feature (UI lightning bolt). Regressions could have happened but we have been quite vigilant
on the fact that these bug fixes needed proper tests, so I am very interested in 1.8.0 ->
1.8.1 regressions. If it is a pre-backfill-change 1.8.0 to 1.8.1 regression then I would also
like to know, cause I made that change and feel responsible for it.
> Cheers
> Bolke
>> On 3 May 2017, at 22:13, Dan Davydov < <>>
>> cc Alex and Rui who were working on fixes, I'm not sure if their commits got in before
>> On Wed, May 3, 2017 at 1:09 PM, Bolke de Bruin < <>>
>> Hi Dan,
>> (Thread renamed to make sure it does not clash, dev@ now added)
>> It surprises me that you found regression from 1.8.0 to 1.8.1 as 1.8.1 is very much
focused on bug fixes. Were the regressions shared yet? 
>> The whole 1.8.X release will be bug fix focused (per release management) and minor
feature updates. The 1.9.0 release will be the first release with major feature updates. So
what you want, more robustness and focus on stability, is now underway. I agree with beefing
up tests and including the major operators in this. Executors should also be on this list
btw. Turning on coverage reporting might be a first step in helping this (it isn’t the solution
>> Cheers
>> Bolke
>>> On 3 May 2017, at 20:28, Dan Davydov < <>>
>>> We saw several regressions moving from 1.8.0 to 1.8.1 the first time we tried,
and while I think we merged all our fixes to master (not sure if they all made it into 1.8.1
however), we have put releasing on hold due to stability issues from the last couple of releases.
It's either the case that:
>>> A) Airbnb requires more robustness from new releases.
>>> or
>>> B) Most companies using Airflow require more robustness and we should halt on
feature work until we are more confident in our testing
>>> I think the biggest problem currently is the lack of unit testing coverage, e.g.
when the backfill framework was refactored (which was the right long-term fix), it caused
a lot of breakages that weren't caught by tests. I think we need to audit the major operators/classes
and beef up the unit testing coverage. The coverage metric does not necessarily cover these
cases (e.g. cyclomatic complexity). Writing regression tests is good but we shouldn't have
so many new blocker issues in our releases.
>>> We are fighting some fires internally at the moment (not Airflow related), but
Alex and I have been working on some stuff that we will push to the community once we are
done. Alex is working on a good solution for python package isolation, and I'm working on
integration with Kubernetes at the executor level.
>>> Feel free to forward any of my messages to the dev mailing list.
>>> On Wed, May 3, 2017 at 11:18 AM, Bolke de Bruin < <>>
>>> Grrr, I seriously dislike to send button on the touch bar…here goes again.
>>> Hi Dan,
>>> (Please note I would like to forward the next message to dev@, but let me know
if you don’t find it comfortable)
>>> I understand your point. The gap between 1.7.1 was large in terms of functionality
changes etc. It was going to be a (bit?) rough and as you guys are using many of the edge
cases you probably found more issues than any of us. Still, between 1.8.0 and 1.8.1 we have
added many tests (coverage increased from 67% to close to 69%, which is a lot as you know).
It would be nice if you can share where your areas of concern are so we can address those
and a suggestion on how to proceed with integration tests is also welcome. 
>>> You guys (=Airbnb) have been a bit quiet over the past couple of days, so I am
getting a bit worried in terms of engagement. Is that warranted?
>>> Cheers
>>> Bolke
>>>> On 3 May 2017, at 20:13, Bolke de Bruin < <>>
>>>> Hi Dan,
>>>> (Please note I would like to forward the next message to dev@, but let me
know if you don’t find it comfortable)
>>>> I understand your point. The gap between 1.7.1 was large in terms of functionality
changes etc. It was going to be a (bit?) rough and as you guys are using many of the edge
cases you probably found more issues than any of us. Still, between 1.8.0 and 1.8.1 we have
added many tests (coverage increased from 67
>>>>> On 3 May 2017, at 19:41, Arthur Wiedmer <
<>> wrote:
>>>>> As a counterpoint,
>>>>> I am comfortable voting +1 on this release in the sense that it fixes
some of the issues with 1.8.0. It is unfortunate that we cannot test it on the Airbnb production
for now and we should definitely invest in increasing testing coverage, but some of the fixes
are needed for ease of use/adoption (See for instance AIRFLOW-832), and this release is a
step in the right direction.
>>>>> Best,
>>>>> Arthur
>>>>> On Wed, May 3, 2017 at 10:30 AM, Dan Davydov <
<>> wrote:
>>>>> I'm not comfortable voting without doing comprehensive staging and we
aren't comfortable doing an internal lease for now until we fix the state of unit test coverage
and integration tests.
>>>>> On May 3, 2017 8:42 AM, "Bolke de Bruin" < <>>
>>>>> Hey Guys,
>>>>> Chris has been preparing the 1.8.1 release and the vote is running for
it. Only one day left though! Would you mind casting your vote? Only Chris and I have voted
binding until so far.
>>>>> (Please reply to the message on the list, not this message).
>>>>> Cheers!
>>>>> Bolke
>>>>>> Begin forwarded message:
>>>>>> From: Chris Riccomini < <>>
>>>>>> Subject: [VOTE] Release Airflow 1.8.1 RC2
>>>>>> Date: 1 May 2017 at 19:58:41 GMT+2
>>>>>> To: <>
>>>>>> Reply-To: <>
>>>>>> Dear All,
>>>>>> _WARN: The package version for this RC is 1.8.1 (does not include
RC2 in
>>>>>> version number). As such, any future 1.8.1 installatinos will have
to be
>>>>>> force installed. PIP will not be able to distinguish between RCs
and final
>>>>>> versions. Again, you'll have to force install the package. This can
be done
>>>>>> by adding `--force-reinstall` to your `pip install` commands._
>>>>>> I've made Airflow 1.8.1 RC2 available at:
>>>>>> <>,
public keys are
>>>>>> available at
>>>>>> New issues fixed in 1.8.1 RC2:
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-1142] SubDAG Tasks Not Executed Even Though All Dependen
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-1004] `airflow webserver -D` runs in foreground
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-492] Insert into dag_stats table results into failed ta
>>>>>> Issues fixed in 1.8.1 RC0/RC1, and included in RC2:
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-1138] Add licenses to files in scripts directory
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-1127] Move license notices to LICENSE instead of NOTICE
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-1124] Do not set all task instances to scheduled on back
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-1120] Update version view to include Apache prefix
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-1062] DagRun#find returns wrong result if external_trigg
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-1054] Fix broken import on test_dag
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-1050] Retries ignored - regression
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-1033] TypeError: can't compare datetime.datetime to None
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-1017] get_task_instance should return None instead of th
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-1011] Fix bug in BackfillJob._execute() for SubDAGs
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-1001] Landing Time shows "unsupported operand type(s) fo
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-1000] Rebrand to Apache Airflow instead of Airflow
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-989] Clear Task Regression
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-974] airflow.util.file mkdir has a race condition
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-906] Update Code icon from lightning bolt to file
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-858] Configurable database name for DB operators
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-853] stdout decode default to A
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-832] Fix debug server
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-817] Trigger dag fails when using CLI + API
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-816] Make sure to pull nvd3 from local resources
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-815] Add previous/next execution dates to available def
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-813] Fix unterminated unit tests in tests.job (tests/jo
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-812] Scheduler job terminates when there is no dag file
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-806] UI should properly ignore DAG doc when it is None
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-794] Consistent access to DAGS_FOLDER and SQL_ALCHEMY_C
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-785] ImportError if cgroupspy is not installed
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-784] Cannot install with funcsigs > 1.0.0
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-780] The UI no longer shows broken DAGs
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-777] dag_is_running is initlialized to True instead of
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-719] Skipped operations make DAG finish prematurely
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-694] Empty env vars do not overwrite non-empty config v
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-139] Executing VACUUM with PostgresOperator
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-111] DAG concurrency is not honored
>>>>>> [AIRFLOW-88] Improve clarity Travis CI reports
>>>>>> I would like to raise a VOTE for releasing 1.8.1 based on release
>>>>>> 2.
>>>>>> Please respond to this email by:
>>>>>> +1,0,-1 with *binding* if you are a PMC member or *non-binding* if
you are
>>>>>> not.
>>>>>> Vote will run for 72 hours (ends this Thursday).
>>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>>> Chris
>>>>>> My VOTE: +1 (binding)
>>>>> -- 
>>>>> Arthur Wiedmer
>>>>> (Pronouns: He, Him) 
>>>>> Data Engineering, Airbnb
>>>>> <>

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message