Displaying "actual" try number in TaskInstance view #34635
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
SamWheating
requested review from
ryanahamilton,
ashb,
bbovenzi,
pierrejeambrun,
kaxil and
XD-DENG
as code owners
SamWheating
force-pushed
the
sw-fix-try-number-in-taskinstance-view
branch
from
1bd04c0
to
9258a24
Compare
bbovenzi
approved these changes
Sep 28, 2023
potiuk
force-pushed
the
sw-fix-try-number-in-taskinstance-view
branch
from
9258a24
to
4081e24
Compare
potiuk
force-pushed
the
sw-fix-try-number-in-taskinstance-view
branch
from
4081e24
to
3d60e85
Compare
|
docs need fixing for that one (and rebase). |
|
ping @SamWheating there is still time for this fix to be included in next release |
|
Thanks for the bump, looking into this now 馃憖 How do you feel about the approach in general? It feels kinda hacky to me, but it technically works so 馃し |
SamWheating
force-pushed
the
sw-fix-try-number-in-taskinstance-view
branch
from
3d60e85
to
c3a7aaa
Compare
SamWheating
force-pushed
the
sw-fix-try-number-in-taskinstance-view
branch
from
c3a7aaa
to
b47d3bd
Compare
@bbovenzi approved so I guess it's OK :) |
eladkal
approved these changes
Nov 24, 2023
Yeah, if this gives the correct number then I'm happy with it. We should check that everywhere uses the right try_number. |
|
@bbovenzi can we merge it then? |
eladkal
force-pushed
the
sw-fix-try-number-in-taskinstance-view
branch
from
f370ca4
to
e8858b9
Compare
|
Merging :) |
jedcunningham
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 9, 2024
(cherry picked from commit ce6ac41)
potiuk
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 13, 2024
(cherry picked from commit ce6ac41)
ephraimbuddy
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 22, 2024
(cherry picked from commit ce6ac41)
68 tasks
abhishekbhakat
pushed a commit
to abhishekbhakat/my_airflow
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 5, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
closes: #34309
Since we do some weird stuff with the
try_numberproperty, we have to do some weird stuff in order to properly search / display it in the UI 馃ゴ:try_number.expressionso that sqlalchemy only sees the actualtry_numbervalue when searching or filtering.prev_attempted_triesproperty in place of thetry_numberproperty in order to display the actualtry_numbervalue.This causes the UI to function as expect, only showing + filtering on the actual value from the DB:
However, this feels pretty hacky and I think that overriding the
hybrid_propertyexpression in particular might cause some issues down the line. I am going to see how complicated it would be to remove the weird try_number property altogether, moving thetry_number+1logic to a separate property or selectively incrementing the value where required.All feedback and suggestions welcome.