Skip to content

Comments

Support deploy command for Remote Execution Deployments#1875

Merged
feluelle merged 1 commit intomainfrom
feature/remote-exec-deploy
Jun 25, 2025
Merged

Support deploy command for Remote Execution Deployments#1875
feluelle merged 1 commit intomainfrom
feature/remote-exec-deploy

Conversation

@feluelle
Copy link
Member

Description

Describe the purpose of this pull request.

This is to support the Remote Execution configuration for Astro Executor Deploys in the CLI.

🎟 Issue(s)

closes: https://github.com/astronomer/astro/issues/29376

🧪 Functional Testing

List the functional testing steps to confirm this feature or fix.

📸 Screenshots

Add screenshots to illustrate the validity of these changes.

📋 Checklist

  • Rebased from the main (or release if patching) branch (before testing)
  • Ran make test before taking out of draft
  • Ran make lint before taking out of draft
  • Added/updated applicable tests
  • Tested against Astro-API (if necessary).
  • Tested against Houston-API and Astronomer (if necessary).
  • Communicated to/tagged owners of respective clients potentially impacted by these changes.
  • Updated any related documentation

@feluelle feluelle requested review from a team and jaketf June 24, 2025 12:26
@feluelle feluelle force-pushed the feature/remote-exec-deploy branch from 5d83f0f to c3df58b Compare June 24, 2025 16:29
jaketf
jaketf previously approved these changes Jun 24, 2025
@jaketf jaketf self-requested a review June 24, 2025 18:52
@jaketf jaketf dismissed their stale review June 24, 2025 18:52

question about from file suppot

DefaultTaskPodMemory: deploymentFromFile.Deployment.Configuration.DefaultTaskPodMemory,
ResourceQuotaCpu: deploymentFromFile.Deployment.Configuration.ResourceQuotaCPU,
ResourceQuotaMemory: deploymentFromFile.Deployment.Configuration.ResourceQuotaMemory,
DefaultTaskPodCpu: &deploymentFromFile.Deployment.Configuration.DefaultTaskPodCPU,
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It seems we need to add a new optional block for the deployment file to configure remote execution can you add that, test it and communicate with @yanmastin-astro re: docs changes to https://www.astronomer.io/docs/astro/deployment-file-reference/

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

from_file is part of deployment create/update, hence you can find it in #1874

@feluelle feluelle requested a review from jaketf June 25, 2025 10:04
Copy link
Contributor

@ianbuss ianbuss left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks straightforward to me. Left a small question about the auto-generated API changes.

CreateEnvironmentObjectLinkRequestScopeDEPLOYMENT CreateEnvironmentObjectLinkRequestScope = "DEPLOYMENT"
)

// Defines values for CreateEnvironmentObjectMetricsExportOverridesRequestAuthType.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The updates in this file seem all unrelated to remote execution and its enablement?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I guess came along for the ride for free when we updated platform-core?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Correct. I have generated it from the release branch that targeted the v1beta1 platform support.

@feluelle feluelle merged commit fa313c3 into main Jun 25, 2025
6 checks passed
@feluelle feluelle deleted the feature/remote-exec-deploy branch June 25, 2025 12:17
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants