Skip to content

Cancel the Redshift statement when a user kills the deferred task - #69631

Closed
steveahnahn wants to merge 1 commit into
apache:mainfrom
steveahnahn:redshift-cancel-statement-on-user-kill-deferred
Closed

Cancel the Redshift statement when a user kills the deferred task#69631
steveahnahn wants to merge 1 commit into
apache:mainfrom
steveahnahn:redshift-cancel-statement-on-user-kill-deferred

Conversation

@steveahnahn

@steveahnahnsteveahnahn commented Jul 8, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Problem

A deferred RedshiftDataOperator parks its query in the triggerer, so the operator's own on_kill no longer runs once the task is deferred. When a user marks that task failed, clears it, or marks it success, RedshiftDataTrigger had no on_kill hook, so the Redshift statement kept running against the cluster or workgroup even though the operator already cancels the statement on kill in the non-deferred path.

On Redshift Serverless a runaway statement keeps billing RPU hours, and on a provisioned cluster it holds a WLM slot, until it finishes on its own.

Change

RedshiftDataTrigger gains an on_kill that cancels the running statement when the user acts on the deferred task, using the hook's async connection (cancel_statement). This matches the behaviour already shipped for the EMR, Dataproc, BigQuery, and Dataflow triggers, and closes the last common AWS gap from the deferrable on_kill work tracked in #36090.

A cancel_on_kill flag (default True) is added to both RedshiftDataOperator and RedshiftDataTrigger so users can opt out, and the operator threads it into the trigger at the defer site. Cancellation is best effort: failures while cancelling are logged and swallowed so the trigger teardown is not blocked.

Precedent

Tests

Trigger tests cover cancel on kill, the disabled and missing statement id no ops, best effort error swallowing, and serialization of the new flag. Operator tests cover the cancel_on_kill=False guard and that the flag is threaded into the trigger on defer. Every new assertion fails without the source change.

Was generative AI tooling used to co-author this PR?
  • Yes — Claude Code (Fable 5)

Generated-by: Claude Code (Fable 5) following the guidelines

@boring-cyborgboring-cyborgBot added area:providers provider:amazon AWS/Amazon - related issues labels Jul 8, 2026
@steveahnahn
Cancel the Redshift statement when a user kills the deferred task
a742e90
A deferred RedshiftDataOperator parks its query in the triggerer, so the
operator's own on_kill no longer runs once the task is deferred. When a user
marks that task failed, clears it, or marks it success, the trigger had no
on_kill hook, so the Redshift statement kept running against the cluster or
workgroup even though the operator already cancels the statement on kill in
the non-deferred path. On Redshift Serverless a runaway statement keeps
billing RPU-hours, and on a provisioned cluster it holds a WLM slot, until it
finishes on its own.
This adds on_kill to RedshiftDataTrigger to cancel the running statement when
the user acts on the deferred task, matching the behaviour already shipped for
the EMR, Dataproc, BigQuery, and Dataflow triggers. A cancel_on_kill flag on
both the operator and the trigger lets users opt out.
@steveahnahn
steveahnahnforce-pushed the redshift-cancel-statement-on-user-kill-deferred branch from bde227d to a742e90CompareJuly 9, 2026 01:03
@steveahnahnsteveahnahn mentioned this pull request Jul 9, 2026
Merged
1 task
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@o-nikolaso-nikolasAwaiting requested review from o-nikolaso-nikolas will be requested when the pull request is marked ready for reviewo-nikolas is a code owner

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

area:providersprovider:amazonAWS/Amazon - related issues

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant

@steveahnahn
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { // Add copy buttons to all 
 blocks
(function() {
function addCopyButtons() {
document.querySelectorAll('pre code').forEach(function(codeBlock) {
if (codeBlock.parentElement.hasAttribute('data-copy-added')) return;
codeBlock.parentElement.setAttribute('data-copy-added', 'true');
var btn = document.createElement('button');
btn.textContent = 'Copy';
btn.style.cssText = 'position:absolute;top:4px;right:4px;padding:2px 8px;font-size:11px;background:#4ecdc4;border:none;border-radius:4px;color:#1a1a2e;cursor:pointer;opacity:0.7;transition:opacity 0.2s;';
btn.onmouseover = function() { this.style.opacity = '1'; };
btn.onmouseout = function() { this.style.opacity = '0.7'; };
btn.onclick = function() {
navigator.clipboard.writeText(codeBlock.textContent).then(function() {
btn.textContent = 'Copied!';
setTimeout(function() { btn.textContent = 'Copy'; }, 1500);
});
};
codeBlock.parentElement.style.position = 'relative';
codeBlock.parentElement.appendChild(btn);
});
}
addCopyButtons();
// Re-run on dynamic content
var observer = new MutationObserver(addCopyButtons);
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Add Copy Buttons to Code Blocks]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "github.com";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + "github\\.com" + '
Cancel the Redshift statement when a user kills the deferred task by steveahnahn · Pull Request #69631 · apache/airflow · GitHub
Skip to content
Cancel the Redshift statement when a user kills the deferred task - #69631
Closed
steveahnahn wants to merge 1 commit into
apache:mainfrom 
steveahnahn:redshift-cancel-statement-on-user-kill-deferred
Closed
Cancel the Redshift statement when a user kills the deferred task#69631
steveahnahn wants to merge 1 commit into
apache:mainfrom 
steveahnahn:redshift-cancel-statement-on-user-kill-deferred
Conversation
@steveahnahn
@steveahnahnsteveahnahn
commented
Jul 8, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Problem
A deferred RedshiftDataOperator parks its query in the triggerer, so the operator's own on_kill no longer runs once the task is deferred. When a user marks that task failed, clears it, or marks it success, RedshiftDataTrigger had no on_kill hook, so the Redshift statement kept running against the cluster or workgroup even though the operator already cancels the statement on kill in the non-deferred path.
On Redshift Serverless a runaway statement keeps billing RPU hours, and on a provisioned cluster it holds a WLM slot, until it finishes on its own.
Change
RedshiftDataTrigger gains an on_kill that cancels the running statement when the user acts on the deferred task, using the hook's async connection (cancel_statement). This matches the behaviour already shipped for the EMR, Dataproc, BigQuery, and Dataflow triggers, and closes the last common AWS gap from the deferrable on_kill work tracked in #36090.
A cancel_on_kill flag (default True) is added to both RedshiftDataOperator and RedshiftDataTrigger so users can opt out, and the operator threads it into the trigger at the defer site. Cancellation is best effort: failures while cancelling are logged and swallowed so the trigger teardown is not blocked.
Precedent
Tests
Trigger tests cover cancel on kill, the disabled and missing statement id no ops, best effort error swallowing, and serialization of the new flag. Operator tests cover the cancel_on_kill=False guard and that the flag is threaded into the trigger on defer. Every new assertion fails without the source change.
Was generative AI tooling used to co-author this PR?
  •  Yes — Claude Code (Fable 5)
Generated-by: Claude Code (Fable 5) following the guidelines
@boring-cyborgboring-cyborgBot
added

area:providers

provider:amazon
AWS/Amazon - related issues
labels
Jul 8, 2026
@steveahnahn
Cancel the Redshift statement when a user kills the deferred task
a742e90
A deferred RedshiftDataOperator parks its query in the triggerer, so the
operator's own on_kill no longer runs once the task is deferred. When a user
marks that task failed, clears it, or marks it success, the trigger had no
on_kill hook, so the Redshift statement kept running against the cluster or
workgroup even though the operator already cancels the statement on kill in
the non-deferred path. On Redshift Serverless a runaway statement keeps
billing RPU-hours, and on a provisioned cluster it holds a WLM slot, until it
finishes on its own.
This adds on_kill to RedshiftDataTrigger to cancel the running statement when
the user acts on the deferred task, matching the behaviour already shipped for
the EMR, Dataproc, BigQuery, and Dataflow triggers. A cancel_on_kill flag on
both the operator and the trigger lets users opt out.
@steveahnahn
steveahnahnforce-pushed
the
redshift-cancel-statement-on-user-kill-deferred
branch
from
bde227d to
a742e90CompareJuly 9, 2026 01:03
@steveahnahnsteveahnahn
mentioned this pull request
Jul 9, 2026
 Merged

1 task
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@o-nikolaso-nikolasAwaiting requested review from o-nikolaso-nikolas will be requested when the pull request is marked ready for reviewo-nikolas is a code owner

Assignees


No one assigned


Labels

area:providersprovider:amazonAWS/Amazon - related issues

Projects


None yet


Milestone


No milestone


Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant

@steveahnahn

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Force GitHub README to respect dark mode
(function() {
var style = document.createElement('style');
style.textContent = '
.markdown-body {
color-scheme: dark light;
}
.markdown-body pre { background: #161b22 !important; }
.markdown-body code { background: rgba(110, 118, 129, 0.4) !important; }
.markdown-body table th, .markdown-body table td { border-color: #30363d !important; }
.markdown-body img { background: #0d1117; }
.markdown-body blockquote { border-left-color: #8b949e; }
.markdown-body hr { border-color: #30363d; }
';
document.head.appendChild(style);
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:GitHub Dark Mode README Fix]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Cancel the Redshift statement when a user kills the deferred task by steveahnahn · Pull Request #69631 · apache/airflow · GitHub
Skip to content
Cancel the Redshift statement when a user kills the deferred task - #69631
Closed
steveahnahn wants to merge 1 commit into
apache:mainfrom 
steveahnahn:redshift-cancel-statement-on-user-kill-deferred
Closed
Cancel the Redshift statement when a user kills the deferred task#69631
steveahnahn wants to merge 1 commit into
apache:mainfrom 
steveahnahn:redshift-cancel-statement-on-user-kill-deferred
Conversation
@steveahnahn
@steveahnahnsteveahnahn
commented
Jul 8, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Problem
A deferred RedshiftDataOperator parks its query in the triggerer, so the operator's own on_kill no longer runs once the task is deferred. When a user marks that task failed, clears it, or marks it success, RedshiftDataTrigger had no on_kill hook, so the Redshift statement kept running against the cluster or workgroup even though the operator already cancels the statement on kill in the non-deferred path.
On Redshift Serverless a runaway statement keeps billing RPU hours, and on a provisioned cluster it holds a WLM slot, until it finishes on its own.
Change
RedshiftDataTrigger gains an on_kill that cancels the running statement when the user acts on the deferred task, using the hook's async connection (cancel_statement). This matches the behaviour already shipped for the EMR, Dataproc, BigQuery, and Dataflow triggers, and closes the last common AWS gap from the deferrable on_kill work tracked in #36090.
A cancel_on_kill flag (default True) is added to both RedshiftDataOperator and RedshiftDataTrigger so users can opt out, and the operator threads it into the trigger at the defer site. Cancellation is best effort: failures while cancelling are logged and swallowed so the trigger teardown is not blocked.
Precedent
Tests
Trigger tests cover cancel on kill, the disabled and missing statement id no ops, best effort error swallowing, and serialization of the new flag. Operator tests cover the cancel_on_kill=False guard and that the flag is threaded into the trigger on defer. Every new assertion fails without the source change.
Was generative AI tooling used to co-author this PR?
  •  Yes — Claude Code (Fable 5)
Generated-by: Claude Code (Fable 5) following the guidelines
@boring-cyborgboring-cyborgBot
added

area:providers

provider:amazon
AWS/Amazon - related issues
labels
Jul 8, 2026
@steveahnahn
Cancel the Redshift statement when a user kills the deferred task
a742e90
A deferred RedshiftDataOperator parks its query in the triggerer, so the
operator's own on_kill no longer runs once the task is deferred. When a user
marks that task failed, clears it, or marks it success, the trigger had no
on_kill hook, so the Redshift statement kept running against the cluster or
workgroup even though the operator already cancels the statement on kill in
the non-deferred path. On Redshift Serverless a runaway statement keeps
billing RPU-hours, and on a provisioned cluster it holds a WLM slot, until it
finishes on its own.
This adds on_kill to RedshiftDataTrigger to cancel the running statement when
the user acts on the deferred task, matching the behaviour already shipped for
the EMR, Dataproc, BigQuery, and Dataflow triggers. A cancel_on_kill flag on
both the operator and the trigger lets users opt out.
@steveahnahn
steveahnahnforce-pushed
the
redshift-cancel-statement-on-user-kill-deferred
branch
from
bde227d to
a742e90CompareJuly 9, 2026 01:03
@steveahnahnsteveahnahn
mentioned this pull request
Jul 9, 2026
 Merged

1 task
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@o-nikolaso-nikolasAwaiting requested review from o-nikolaso-nikolas will be requested when the pull request is marked ready for reviewo-nikolas is a code owner

Assignees


No one assigned


Labels

area:providersprovider:amazonAWS/Amazon - related issues

Projects


None yet


Milestone


No milestone


Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant

@steveahnahn

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Highlight search terms from Google/DuckDuckGo/Bing referrer
(function() {
var ref = document.referrer;
var terms = [];
if (ref.includes('google.com') || ref.includes('duckduckgo.com') || ref.includes('bing.com')) {
var url = new URL(ref);
var q = url.searchParams.get('q') || url.searchParams.get('p');
if (q) {
terms = q.split(/\s+/).filter(function(t) { return t.length > 2; });
}
}
if (terms.length === 0) return;
var style = document.createElement('style');
style.textContent = '.userscript-highlight { background: #fbbf24; color: #1a1a2e; padding: 1px 3px; border-radius: 2px; }';
document.head.appendChild(style);
function highlight(node) {
if (node.nodeType === 3) { // text node
var text = node.textContent;
var found = false;
terms.forEach(function(term) {
var regex = new RegExp('(' + term.replace(/[.*+?^${}()|[\]\\]/g, '\\') + ')', 'gi');
if (regex.test(text)) {
found = true;
var frag = document.createDocumentFragment();
var parts = text.split(regex);
parts.forEach(function(part, i) {
if (i % 2 === 0) {
frag.appendChild(document.createTextNode(part));
} else {
var span = document.createElement('span');
span.className = 'userscript-highlight';
span.textContent = part;
frag.appendChild(span);
}
});
node.parentNode.replaceChild(frag, node);
}
});
} else if (node.nodeType === 1 && node.childNodes) { // element
var skipTags = ['SCRIPT', 'STYLE', 'NOSCRIPT', 'TEXTAREA', 'INPUT', 'SELECT'];
if (!skipTags.includes(node.tagName)) {
Array.from(node.childNodes).forEach(highlight);
}
}
}
highlight(document.body);
// Re-highlight on dynamic content
var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {
mutations.forEach(function(m) {
m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {
if (node.nodeType === 1 || node.nodeType === 3) highlight(node);
});
});
});
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Highlight Search Terms]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Cancel the Redshift statement when a user kills the deferred task by steveahnahn · Pull Request #69631 · apache/airflow · GitHub
Skip to content
Cancel the Redshift statement when a user kills the deferred task - #69631
Closed
steveahnahn wants to merge 1 commit into
apache:mainfrom 
steveahnahn:redshift-cancel-statement-on-user-kill-deferred
Closed
Cancel the Redshift statement when a user kills the deferred task#69631
steveahnahn wants to merge 1 commit into
apache:mainfrom 
steveahnahn:redshift-cancel-statement-on-user-kill-deferred
Conversation
@steveahnahn
@steveahnahnsteveahnahn
commented
Jul 8, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Problem
A deferred RedshiftDataOperator parks its query in the triggerer, so the operator's own on_kill no longer runs once the task is deferred. When a user marks that task failed, clears it, or marks it success, RedshiftDataTrigger had no on_kill hook, so the Redshift statement kept running against the cluster or workgroup even though the operator already cancels the statement on kill in the non-deferred path.
On Redshift Serverless a runaway statement keeps billing RPU hours, and on a provisioned cluster it holds a WLM slot, until it finishes on its own.
Change
RedshiftDataTrigger gains an on_kill that cancels the running statement when the user acts on the deferred task, using the hook's async connection (cancel_statement). This matches the behaviour already shipped for the EMR, Dataproc, BigQuery, and Dataflow triggers, and closes the last common AWS gap from the deferrable on_kill work tracked in #36090.
A cancel_on_kill flag (default True) is added to both RedshiftDataOperator and RedshiftDataTrigger so users can opt out, and the operator threads it into the trigger at the defer site. Cancellation is best effort: failures while cancelling are logged and swallowed so the trigger teardown is not blocked.
Precedent
Tests
Trigger tests cover cancel on kill, the disabled and missing statement id no ops, best effort error swallowing, and serialization of the new flag. Operator tests cover the cancel_on_kill=False guard and that the flag is threaded into the trigger on defer. Every new assertion fails without the source change.
Was generative AI tooling used to co-author this PR?
  •  Yes — Claude Code (Fable 5)
Generated-by: Claude Code (Fable 5) following the guidelines
@boring-cyborgboring-cyborgBot
added

area:providers

provider:amazon
AWS/Amazon - related issues
labels
Jul 8, 2026
@steveahnahn
Cancel the Redshift statement when a user kills the deferred task
a742e90
A deferred RedshiftDataOperator parks its query in the triggerer, so the
operator's own on_kill no longer runs once the task is deferred. When a user
marks that task failed, clears it, or marks it success, the trigger had no
on_kill hook, so the Redshift statement kept running against the cluster or
workgroup even though the operator already cancels the statement on kill in
the non-deferred path. On Redshift Serverless a runaway statement keeps
billing RPU-hours, and on a provisioned cluster it holds a WLM slot, until it
finishes on its own.
This adds on_kill to RedshiftDataTrigger to cancel the running statement when
the user acts on the deferred task, matching the behaviour already shipped for
the EMR, Dataproc, BigQuery, and Dataflow triggers. A cancel_on_kill flag on
both the operator and the trigger lets users opt out.
@steveahnahn
steveahnahnforce-pushed
the
redshift-cancel-statement-on-user-kill-deferred
branch
from
bde227d to
a742e90CompareJuly 9, 2026 01:03
@steveahnahnsteveahnahn
mentioned this pull request
Jul 9, 2026
 Merged

1 task
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@o-nikolaso-nikolasAwaiting requested review from o-nikolaso-nikolas will be requested when the pull request is marked ready for reviewo-nikolas is a code owner

Assignees


No one assigned


Labels

area:providersprovider:amazonAWS/Amazon - related issues

Projects


None yet


Milestone


No milestone


Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant

@steveahnahn

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Strip utm_, fbclid, gclid, etc. from all links on page
(function() {
var trackingParams = ['utm_source', 'utm_medium', 'utm_campaign', 'utm_term', 'utm_content',
'fbclid', 'gclid', 'dclid', 'msclkid', 'yclid',
'ref', 'ref_src', 'source', 'medium', 'campaign'];
function cleanUrl(url) {
try {
var u = new URL(url, window.location.origin);
var changed = false;
trackingParams.forEach(function(p) {
if (u.searchParams.has(p)) {
u.searchParams.delete(p);
changed = true;
}
});
return changed ? u.toString() : url;
} catch (e) {
return url;
}
}
function cleanLinks() {
document.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {
var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);
if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;
});
}
cleanLinks();
var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {
mutations.forEach(function(m) {
m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {
if (node.nodeType === 1) {
if (node.tagName === 'A') cleanLinks();
node.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {
var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);
if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;
});
}
});
});
});
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Remove Tracking Parameters from Links]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "youtube.com";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + "youtube\\.com" + '
Cancel the Redshift statement when a user kills the deferred task by steveahnahn · Pull Request #69631 · apache/airflow · GitHub
Skip to content
Cancel the Redshift statement when a user kills the deferred task - #69631
Closed
steveahnahn wants to merge 1 commit into
apache:mainfrom 
steveahnahn:redshift-cancel-statement-on-user-kill-deferred
Closed
Cancel the Redshift statement when a user kills the deferred task#69631
steveahnahn wants to merge 1 commit into
apache:mainfrom 
steveahnahn:redshift-cancel-statement-on-user-kill-deferred
Conversation
@steveahnahn
@steveahnahnsteveahnahn
commented
Jul 8, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Problem
A deferred RedshiftDataOperator parks its query in the triggerer, so the operator's own on_kill no longer runs once the task is deferred. When a user marks that task failed, clears it, or marks it success, RedshiftDataTrigger had no on_kill hook, so the Redshift statement kept running against the cluster or workgroup even though the operator already cancels the statement on kill in the non-deferred path.
On Redshift Serverless a runaway statement keeps billing RPU hours, and on a provisioned cluster it holds a WLM slot, until it finishes on its own.
Change
RedshiftDataTrigger gains an on_kill that cancels the running statement when the user acts on the deferred task, using the hook's async connection (cancel_statement). This matches the behaviour already shipped for the EMR, Dataproc, BigQuery, and Dataflow triggers, and closes the last common AWS gap from the deferrable on_kill work tracked in #36090.
A cancel_on_kill flag (default True) is added to both RedshiftDataOperator and RedshiftDataTrigger so users can opt out, and the operator threads it into the trigger at the defer site. Cancellation is best effort: failures while cancelling are logged and swallowed so the trigger teardown is not blocked.
Precedent
Tests
Trigger tests cover cancel on kill, the disabled and missing statement id no ops, best effort error swallowing, and serialization of the new flag. Operator tests cover the cancel_on_kill=False guard and that the flag is threaded into the trigger on defer. Every new assertion fails without the source change.
Was generative AI tooling used to co-author this PR?
  •  Yes — Claude Code (Fable 5)
Generated-by: Claude Code (Fable 5) following the guidelines
@boring-cyborgboring-cyborgBot
added

area:providers

provider:amazon
AWS/Amazon - related issues
labels
Jul 8, 2026
@steveahnahn
Cancel the Redshift statement when a user kills the deferred task
a742e90
A deferred RedshiftDataOperator parks its query in the triggerer, so the
operator's own on_kill no longer runs once the task is deferred. When a user
marks that task failed, clears it, or marks it success, the trigger had no
on_kill hook, so the Redshift statement kept running against the cluster or
workgroup even though the operator already cancels the statement on kill in
the non-deferred path. On Redshift Serverless a runaway statement keeps
billing RPU-hours, and on a provisioned cluster it holds a WLM slot, until it
finishes on its own.
This adds on_kill to RedshiftDataTrigger to cancel the running statement when
the user acts on the deferred task, matching the behaviour already shipped for
the EMR, Dataproc, BigQuery, and Dataflow triggers. A cancel_on_kill flag on
both the operator and the trigger lets users opt out.
@steveahnahn
steveahnahnforce-pushed
the
redshift-cancel-statement-on-user-kill-deferred
branch
from
bde227d to
a742e90CompareJuly 9, 2026 01:03
@steveahnahnsteveahnahn
mentioned this pull request
Jul 9, 2026
 Merged

1 task
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@o-nikolaso-nikolasAwaiting requested review from o-nikolaso-nikolas will be requested when the pull request is marked ready for reviewo-nikolas is a code owner

Assignees


No one assigned


Labels

area:providersprovider:amazonAWS/Amazon - related issues

Projects


None yet


Milestone


No milestone


Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant

@steveahnahn

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Auto-enable theater mode on YouTube
(function() {
function tryTheater() {
var btn = document.querySelector('button[aria-label="Theater mode"], ytd-player #player button[title="Theater mode"]');
if (btn && !btn.classList.contains('activated')) {
btn.click();
}
}
// Try immediately
tryTheater();
// Try after navigation (SPA)
var lastUrl = location.href;
setInterval(function() {
if (location.href !== lastUrl) {
lastUrl = location.href;
setTimeout(tryTheater, 500);
}
}, 1000);
// Also try on player load
var observer = new MutationObserver(tryTheater);
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:YouTube Theater Mode Default]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Cancel the Redshift statement when a user kills the deferred task by steveahnahn · Pull Request #69631 · apache/airflow · GitHub
Skip to content
Cancel the Redshift statement when a user kills the deferred task - #69631
Closed
steveahnahn wants to merge 1 commit into
apache:mainfrom 
steveahnahn:redshift-cancel-statement-on-user-kill-deferred
Closed
Cancel the Redshift statement when a user kills the deferred task#69631
steveahnahn wants to merge 1 commit into
apache:mainfrom 
steveahnahn:redshift-cancel-statement-on-user-kill-deferred
Conversation
@steveahnahn
@steveahnahnsteveahnahn
commented
Jul 8, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Problem
A deferred RedshiftDataOperator parks its query in the triggerer, so the operator's own on_kill no longer runs once the task is deferred. When a user marks that task failed, clears it, or marks it success, RedshiftDataTrigger had no on_kill hook, so the Redshift statement kept running against the cluster or workgroup even though the operator already cancels the statement on kill in the non-deferred path.
On Redshift Serverless a runaway statement keeps billing RPU hours, and on a provisioned cluster it holds a WLM slot, until it finishes on its own.
Change
RedshiftDataTrigger gains an on_kill that cancels the running statement when the user acts on the deferred task, using the hook's async connection (cancel_statement). This matches the behaviour already shipped for the EMR, Dataproc, BigQuery, and Dataflow triggers, and closes the last common AWS gap from the deferrable on_kill work tracked in #36090.
A cancel_on_kill flag (default True) is added to both RedshiftDataOperator and RedshiftDataTrigger so users can opt out, and the operator threads it into the trigger at the defer site. Cancellation is best effort: failures while cancelling are logged and swallowed so the trigger teardown is not blocked.
Precedent
Tests
Trigger tests cover cancel on kill, the disabled and missing statement id no ops, best effort error swallowing, and serialization of the new flag. Operator tests cover the cancel_on_kill=False guard and that the flag is threaded into the trigger on defer. Every new assertion fails without the source change.
Was generative AI tooling used to co-author this PR?
  •  Yes — Claude Code (Fable 5)
Generated-by: Claude Code (Fable 5) following the guidelines
@boring-cyborgboring-cyborgBot
added

area:providers

provider:amazon
AWS/Amazon - related issues
labels
Jul 8, 2026
@steveahnahn
Cancel the Redshift statement when a user kills the deferred task
a742e90
A deferred RedshiftDataOperator parks its query in the triggerer, so the
operator's own on_kill no longer runs once the task is deferred. When a user
marks that task failed, clears it, or marks it success, the trigger had no
on_kill hook, so the Redshift statement kept running against the cluster or
workgroup even though the operator already cancels the statement on kill in
the non-deferred path. On Redshift Serverless a runaway statement keeps
billing RPU-hours, and on a provisioned cluster it holds a WLM slot, until it
finishes on its own.
This adds on_kill to RedshiftDataTrigger to cancel the running statement when
the user acts on the deferred task, matching the behaviour already shipped for
the EMR, Dataproc, BigQuery, and Dataflow triggers. A cancel_on_kill flag on
both the operator and the trigger lets users opt out.
@steveahnahn
steveahnahnforce-pushed
the
redshift-cancel-statement-on-user-kill-deferred
branch
from
bde227d to
a742e90CompareJuly 9, 2026 01:03
@steveahnahnsteveahnahn
mentioned this pull request
Jul 9, 2026
 Merged

1 task
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@o-nikolaso-nikolasAwaiting requested review from o-nikolaso-nikolas will be requested when the pull request is marked ready for reviewo-nikolas is a code owner

Assignees


No one assigned


Labels

area:providersprovider:amazonAWS/Amazon - related issues

Projects


None yet


Milestone


No milestone


Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant

@steveahnahn

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Remove or un-stick sticky/fixed headers that block content
(function() {
function unstick() {
document.querySelectorAll('header, nav, [role="banner"], .header, .navbar, .sticky, .fixed-top, [style*="position: fixed"], [style*="position:sticky"]').forEach(function(el) {
if (el.style.position === 'fixed' || el.style.position === 'sticky' || getComputedStyle(el).position === 'fixed' || getComputedStyle(el).position === 'sticky') {
el.style.position = 'static';
el.style.top = 'auto';
el.style.zIndex = 'auto';
}
});
}
unstick();
var observer = new MutationObserver(unstick);
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true, attributes: true, attributeFilter: ['style', 'class'] });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Kill Sticky Headers]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Cancel the Redshift statement when a user kills the deferred task by steveahnahn · Pull Request #69631 · apache/airflow · GitHub
Skip to content
Cancel the Redshift statement when a user kills the deferred task - #69631
Closed
steveahnahn wants to merge 1 commit into
apache:mainfrom 
steveahnahn:redshift-cancel-statement-on-user-kill-deferred
Closed
Cancel the Redshift statement when a user kills the deferred task#69631
steveahnahn wants to merge 1 commit into
apache:mainfrom 
steveahnahn:redshift-cancel-statement-on-user-kill-deferred
Conversation
@steveahnahn
@steveahnahnsteveahnahn
commented
Jul 8, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Problem
A deferred RedshiftDataOperator parks its query in the triggerer, so the operator's own on_kill no longer runs once the task is deferred. When a user marks that task failed, clears it, or marks it success, RedshiftDataTrigger had no on_kill hook, so the Redshift statement kept running against the cluster or workgroup even though the operator already cancels the statement on kill in the non-deferred path.
On Redshift Serverless a runaway statement keeps billing RPU hours, and on a provisioned cluster it holds a WLM slot, until it finishes on its own.
Change
RedshiftDataTrigger gains an on_kill that cancels the running statement when the user acts on the deferred task, using the hook's async connection (cancel_statement). This matches the behaviour already shipped for the EMR, Dataproc, BigQuery, and Dataflow triggers, and closes the last common AWS gap from the deferrable on_kill work tracked in #36090.
A cancel_on_kill flag (default True) is added to both RedshiftDataOperator and RedshiftDataTrigger so users can opt out, and the operator threads it into the trigger at the defer site. Cancellation is best effort: failures while cancelling are logged and swallowed so the trigger teardown is not blocked.
Precedent
Tests
Trigger tests cover cancel on kill, the disabled and missing statement id no ops, best effort error swallowing, and serialization of the new flag. Operator tests cover the cancel_on_kill=False guard and that the flag is threaded into the trigger on defer. Every new assertion fails without the source change.
Was generative AI tooling used to co-author this PR?
  •  Yes — Claude Code (Fable 5)
Generated-by: Claude Code (Fable 5) following the guidelines
@boring-cyborgboring-cyborgBot
added

area:providers

provider:amazon
AWS/Amazon - related issues
labels
Jul 8, 2026
@steveahnahn
Cancel the Redshift statement when a user kills the deferred task
a742e90
A deferred RedshiftDataOperator parks its query in the triggerer, so the
operator's own on_kill no longer runs once the task is deferred. When a user
marks that task failed, clears it, or marks it success, the trigger had no
on_kill hook, so the Redshift statement kept running against the cluster or
workgroup even though the operator already cancels the statement on kill in
the non-deferred path. On Redshift Serverless a runaway statement keeps
billing RPU-hours, and on a provisioned cluster it holds a WLM slot, until it
finishes on its own.
This adds on_kill to RedshiftDataTrigger to cancel the running statement when
the user acts on the deferred task, matching the behaviour already shipped for
the EMR, Dataproc, BigQuery, and Dataflow triggers. A cancel_on_kill flag on
both the operator and the trigger lets users opt out.
@steveahnahn
steveahnahnforce-pushed
the
redshift-cancel-statement-on-user-kill-deferred
branch
from
bde227d to
a742e90CompareJuly 9, 2026 01:03
@steveahnahnsteveahnahn
mentioned this pull request
Jul 9, 2026
 Merged

1 task
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@o-nikolaso-nikolasAwaiting requested review from o-nikolaso-nikolas will be requested when the pull request is marked ready for reviewo-nikolas is a code owner

Assignees


No one assigned


Labels

area:providersprovider:amazonAWS/Amazon - related issues

Projects


None yet


Milestone


No milestone


Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant

@steveahnahn

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Universal Dark Mode - works on any site
(function() {
var enabled = true;
function applyDarkMode() {
if (!enabled) return;
// Create style element if it doesn't exist
var style = document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style');
if (!style) {
style = document.createElement('style');
style.id = 'universal-dark-mode-style';
document.head.appendChild(style);
}
// Dark mode CSS - inverts colors but preserves images/video
style.textContent = '
/* Invert everything except media */
html {
filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;
background: #1a1a2e !important;
}
/* Restore images, videos, iframes, canvas */
img, video, iframe, canvas, svg, picture, [style*="background-image"] {
filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;
}
/* Preserve specific elements that should not be inverted */
.no-dark-mode, .no-dark-mode *,
[data-theme="light"], [data-theme="light"],
.ace_editor, .ace_editor *,
.CodeMirror, .CodeMirror *,
.monaco-editor, .monaco-editor *,
.markdown-body pre, .markdown-body pre *,
.highlight, .highlight *,
pre code, pre code * {
filter: none !important;
}
/* Fix common UI elements */
.modal, .popup, .dropdown-menu, .tooltip, .popover {
filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;
background: #2d2d44 !important;
border-color: #444 !important;
}
/* Scrollbars */
::-webkit-scrollbar { background: #1a1a2e !important; }
::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb { background: #444 !important; }
::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb:hover { background: #555 !important; }
/* Selection */
::selection { background: #4ecdc4 !important; color: #1a1a2e !important; }
::-moz-selection { background: #4ecdc4 !important; color: #1a1a2e !important; }
';
}
function removeDarkMode() {
var style = document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style');
if (style) style.remove();
}
// Toggle with Alt+Shift+D
document.addEventListener('keydown', function(e) {
if (e.altKey && e.shiftKey && e.key === 'D') {
e.preventDefault();
enabled = !enabled;
if (enabled) {
applyDarkMode();
console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Enabled');
} else {
removeDarkMode();
console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Disabled');
}
}
});
// Apply on load
applyDarkMode();
// Re-apply on dynamic content
var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {
if (enabled && !document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style')) {
applyDarkMode();
}
});
observer.observe(document.head, { childList: true });
console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Loaded - Press Alt+Shift+D to toggle');
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Universal Dark Mode]', __e); }
})();
})();
Cancel the Redshift statement when a user kills the deferred task by steveahnahn · Pull Request #69631 · apache/airflow · GitHub
Skip to content
Cancel the Redshift statement when a user kills the deferred task - #69631
Closed
steveahnahn wants to merge 1 commit into
apache:mainfrom 
steveahnahn:redshift-cancel-statement-on-user-kill-deferred
Closed
Cancel the Redshift statement when a user kills the deferred task#69631
steveahnahn wants to merge 1 commit into
apache:mainfrom 
steveahnahn:redshift-cancel-statement-on-user-kill-deferred
Conversation
@steveahnahn
@steveahnahnsteveahnahn
commented
Jul 8, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Problem
A deferred RedshiftDataOperator parks its query in the triggerer, so the operator's own on_kill no longer runs once the task is deferred. When a user marks that task failed, clears it, or marks it success, RedshiftDataTrigger had no on_kill hook, so the Redshift statement kept running against the cluster or workgroup even though the operator already cancels the statement on kill in the non-deferred path.
On Redshift Serverless a runaway statement keeps billing RPU hours, and on a provisioned cluster it holds a WLM slot, until it finishes on its own.
Change
RedshiftDataTrigger gains an on_kill that cancels the running statement when the user acts on the deferred task, using the hook's async connection (cancel_statement). This matches the behaviour already shipped for the EMR, Dataproc, BigQuery, and Dataflow triggers, and closes the last common AWS gap from the deferrable on_kill work tracked in #36090.
A cancel_on_kill flag (default True) is added to both RedshiftDataOperator and RedshiftDataTrigger so users can opt out, and the operator threads it into the trigger at the defer site. Cancellation is best effort: failures while cancelling are logged and swallowed so the trigger teardown is not blocked.
Precedent
Tests
Trigger tests cover cancel on kill, the disabled and missing statement id no ops, best effort error swallowing, and serialization of the new flag. Operator tests cover the cancel_on_kill=False guard and that the flag is threaded into the trigger on defer. Every new assertion fails without the source change.
Was generative AI tooling used to co-author this PR?
  •  Yes — Claude Code (Fable 5)
Generated-by: Claude Code (Fable 5) following the guidelines
@boring-cyborgboring-cyborgBot
added

area:providers

provider:amazon
AWS/Amazon - related issues
labels
Jul 8, 2026
@steveahnahn
Cancel the Redshift statement when a user kills the deferred task
a742e90
A deferred RedshiftDataOperator parks its query in the triggerer, so the
operator's own on_kill no longer runs once the task is deferred. When a user
marks that task failed, clears it, or marks it success, the trigger had no
on_kill hook, so the Redshift statement kept running against the cluster or
workgroup even though the operator already cancels the statement on kill in
the non-deferred path. On Redshift Serverless a runaway statement keeps
billing RPU-hours, and on a provisioned cluster it holds a WLM slot, until it
finishes on its own.
This adds on_kill to RedshiftDataTrigger to cancel the running statement when
the user acts on the deferred task, matching the behaviour already shipped for
the EMR, Dataproc, BigQuery, and Dataflow triggers. A cancel_on_kill flag on
both the operator and the trigger lets users opt out.
@steveahnahn
steveahnahnforce-pushed
the
redshift-cancel-statement-on-user-kill-deferred
branch
from
bde227d to
a742e90CompareJuly 9, 2026 01:03
@steveahnahnsteveahnahn
mentioned this pull request
Jul 9, 2026
 Merged

1 task
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@o-nikolaso-nikolasAwaiting requested review from o-nikolaso-nikolas will be requested when the pull request is marked ready for reviewo-nikolas is a code owner

Assignees


No one assigned


Labels

area:providersprovider:amazonAWS/Amazon - related issues

Projects


None yet


Milestone


No milestone


Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant

@steveahnahn