Mark Task Groups as Success/Failure#30478
Merged
Merged
Conversation
tquazi
requested review from
XD-DENG,
ashb,
bbovenzi,
kaxil and
ryanahamilton
as code owners
April 5, 2023 05:35
boring-cyborg
Bot
added
area:UI
Contributor
Author
|
Here is the screenshot of the UI Layout: |
Contributor
Author
|
fyi @eladkal @pierrejeambrun Please review |
utkarsharma2
reviewed
Apr 5, 2023
tquazi
marked this pull request as draft
April 5, 2023 15:09
tquazi
marked this pull request as ready for review
April 5, 2023 21:06
jedcunningham
previously requested changes
Apr 5, 2023
jedcunningham
left a comment
jedcunningham
left a comment
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This also needs test coverage.
Contributor
Author
I have added Test Cases for dag.set_task_group_state and view._mark_task_group_state. |
ashb
reviewed
Apr 14, 2023
ashb
reviewed
Apr 14, 2023
ashb
reviewed
Apr 14, 2023
ashb
reviewed
Apr 14, 2023
ashb
reviewed
Apr 14, 2023
1. Added Test Cases for dag.set_task_group_state and view._mark_task_group_state. 2. Added new method dag.set_task_group_state, which can be used when setting the state on a task group.
tquazi
force-pushed
the
taskgroup-actions
branch
from
April 15, 2023 17:23
d7f3760 to
97b99d2
Compare
1. Added Test Cases for dag.set_task_group_state and view._mark_task_group_state. 2. Added new method dag.set_task_group_state, which can be used when setting the state on a task group.
tquazi
force-pushed
the
taskgroup-actions
branch
from
April 15, 2023 17:27
97b99d2 to
aeb2d66
Compare
Added warning if marking past/future tasks as Success/Failure
Contributor
Author
|
|
6 tasks
dstandish
approved these changes
Apr 27, 2023
|
Awesome work, congrats on your first merged pull request! You are invited to check our Issue Tracker for additional contributions. |
Contributor
|
Will this change still work now that the task group button actions have been moved in the ui? |
Contributor
Yep! |
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
8 participants
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: #30220
This pull request adds ability to mark task groups as success/failure and have that propagate to the tasks within that task group. This feature is designed to provide a more efficient way to adjust the status of multiple tasks at once, especially for complex workflows with large numbers of tasks.
One of the primary use cases for this feature is when certain tasks in a task group have failed due to unexpected issues. Instead of manually setting the status of each failed task to "failed", users can mark the entire task group as "failed", and the system will automatically propagate this status to all tasks within the group. Similarly, in the case of a manual DAG run triggered through the UI or the API, where certain tasks or sensors may not matter for that run, users can easily mark the entire task group as "success" to avoid having to set each task individually.
I have tested this feature. Please let me know if there are any further changes or improvements that you would like me to make before merging this pull request.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
^ Add meaningful description above
Read the Pull Request Guidelines for more information.
In case of fundamental code changes, an Airflow Improvement Proposal (AIP) is needed.
In case of a new dependency, check compliance with the ASF 3rd Party License Policy.
In case of backwards incompatible changes please leave a note in a newsfragment file, named
{pr_number}.significant.rstor{issue_number}.significant.rst, in newsfragments.