-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13.7k
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
Add map_index label to mapped KubernetesPodOperator #21916
Conversation
The PR is likely OK to be merged with just subset of tests for default Python and Database versions without running the full matrix of tests, because it does not modify the core of Airflow. If the committers decide that the full tests matrix is needed, they will add the label 'full tests needed'. Then you should rebase to the latest main or amend the last commit of the PR, and push it with --force-with-lease. |
} | ||
ti = context['ti'] | ||
|
||
labels = {'dag_id': ti.dag_id, 'task_id': ti.task_id, 'execution_date': context['ts']} |
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.
probably we should replace execution_date
with run_id
here, since that is now the "real" PK component right?. the signifigance of these labels, AFAIK, is just for "reattaching" to a pod after interruption, so it's just meant to be attrs that uniquely identify the TI. though it needn't necessarily be done in this PR of course.
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.
I had that at first here but it makes the change about task mapping hard to see, so I've got it in a separate commit/pr
(If you haven't noticed I'm a big fan of Pr=one thing, especially as changelog comes from commit messages.)
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.
yup, makes sense
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 seems remarkable simple. Have I missed something?