Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
- Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 17.7k
WIP/Idea: Pass task output as outlet to dataset trigger params#37888
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Closed
jscheffl
wants to merge
1
commit into
apache:main
from
boschglobal:feature/37810-use-xcom-output-as-extra-for-dataset-trigger
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Closed
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This feels a bit too heavy-handed, but I like the idea of passing in event extras as the downstream DAG run parameters. (Should we use conf or params for this?)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The code was just an idea - not finally thought through. If you say "heavy handed"... what do you mean? too brute force and the user does not know what comes out? Or do you mean we need a better merging mechanism? Or some hooking to be able to inject a custom merging strategy? Or just "code is ugly" :-D
Background: I would assume that in 90% of cases a single DAG triggers a dataset. THeremight be cases where multiple events come together to trigger. In such case we need to merge
extras. I'd assume most times it is "conflict free" but you never know. Might be a feature to have it "last property wins" to collect events but otherwise if users feel there are too many conflicts, individual extras can also be produced "conflict free" with individual keys.confvs.params:Yes,
paramsanddag_run.confsomehow should be merged. I believe this is a leftover in the API from the past. CONF is the dict which is used to trigger a DAG. The conf is persisted as blob with the DagRun.During runtime the conf is available in the context as dict, representing 1:1 the conf used to trigger. No validation. Just a dict.
paramsin contrast have default values, conf is setting values on top and the result is JSON validated.Both
üaramsandconfare available in the context and can be used. I believre mid-term we should deprecate the usage of conf in the DAG and consolidate to the (more and better functional) params. But for today params only exist during runtime.@hussein-awala did an attempt here but it dd not make it to finish line: #29174