Status of testing Providers that were prepared on March 23, 2022 #22480

Activity

1. potiuk

   added

   kind:metaHigh-level information important to the communityHigh-level information important to the community

   on Mar 22, 2022
2. alexott commented on Mar 23, 2022

   

   alexott

   on Mar 23, 2022

   Contributor

   More actions

   I don't know if it makes sense to release Databricks provider after #22422 is merged?
3. raphaelauv commented on Mar 23, 2022

   

   raphaelauv

   on Mar 23, 2022

   Contributor

   More actions

   #22385: @potiuk -> WORK

   airlfow 2.1.4 with apache-airflow-providers-cncf-kubernetes==3.1.1

   give

   [2022-03-23 09:56:34,086] {taskinstance.py:1252} INFO - Exporting the following env vars:
   AIRFLOW_CTX_DAG_OWNER=airflow
   AIRFLOW_CTX_DAG_ID=kubernetes_dag
   AIRFLOW_CTX_TASK_ID=task-one
   AIRFLOW_CTX_EXECUTION_DATE=2022-03-14T00:00:00+00:00
   AIRFLOW_CTX_DAG_RUN_ID=scheduled__2022-03-14T00:00:00+00:00
   [2022-03-23 09:56:34,096] {kubernetes_pod.py:571} ERROR - 'NoneType' object has no attribute 'metadata'
   Traceback (most recent call last):
     File "/usr/local/lib/python3.9/site-packages/airflow/providers/cncf/kubernetes/operators/kubernetes_pod.py", line 368, in execute
       self.pod_request_obj = self.build_pod_request_obj(context)
     File "/usr/local/lib/python3.9/site-packages/airflow/providers/cncf/kubernetes/operators/kubernetes_pod.py", line 524, in build_pod_request_obj
       labels = self._get_ti_pod_labels(context)
     File "/usr/local/lib/python3.9/site-packages/airflow/providers/cncf/kubernetes/operators/kubernetes_pod.py", line 286, in _get_ti_pod_labels
       run_id = getattr(ti, 'run_id') or context['run_id']
   AttributeError: 'TaskInstance' object has no attribute 'run_id'
   
   

   airflow 2.1.4 with apache-airflow-providers-cncf-kubernetes==3.1.2rc1

   give

   [2022-03-23 09:58:46,424] {taskinstance.py:1252} INFO - Exporting the following env vars:
   AIRFLOW_CTX_DAG_OWNER=airflow
   AIRFLOW_CTX_DAG_ID=kubernetes_dag
   AIRFLOW_CTX_TASK_ID=task-one
   AIRFLOW_CTX_EXECUTION_DATE=2022-03-13T00:00:00+00:00
   AIRFLOW_CTX_DAG_RUN_ID=scheduled__2022-03-13T00:00:00+00:00
   [2022-03-23 09:58:46,428] {kubernetes_pod.py:525} INFO - Creating pod airflow-test-pod.186f4469675a401aa74c57c002ee8be4 with labels: {'dag_id': 'kubernetes_dag', 'task_id': 'task-one', 'run_id': 'scheduled__2022-03-13T0000000000-eef165281', 'try_number': '2'}
   [2022-03-23 09:58:46,485] {pod_manager.py:159} WARNING - Pod not yet started: airflow-test-pod.186f4469675a401aa74c57c002ee8be4
   [2022-03-23 09:58:47,496] {pod_manager.py:159} WARNING - Pod not yet started: airflow-test-pod.186f4469675a401aa74c57c002ee8be4
   [2022-03-23 09:58:48,517] {pod_manager.py:199} INFO - toto
   

   ❤️React with ❤️1Reacted by Jarek Potiuk
4. potiuk commented on Mar 23, 2022

   

   potiuk

   on Mar 23, 2022

   MemberAuthor

   More actions

   I don't know if it makes sense to release Databricks provider after #22422 is merged?

   This is a really a bugfix relase with all those things that were merged till yesterday (we have to re-release all packages due to #22380 . We will have another release in about two weeks with only changed providers. I am not sure how fast #22422 is going to be merged, but I do not want to wait with this release as it caused pain already to a number of people and I prefer to relave the pain ASAP.

   Also there might be some bugs found in the new change that will make whole databricks provider to be removed from the release and I want to make sure "all" providers are released ASAP due to the#22380 bug.
5. potiuk commented on Mar 23, 2022

   

   potiuk

   on Mar 23, 2022

   MemberAuthor

   More actions

   #22385: @potiuk -> WORK

   Thanks @raphaelauv! Glad to hear. Next to #22380 this one the one I want to have released asap :) (@alexott - this was also the reason I do not want to wait for any other merges).

   👍React with 👍1Reacted by raphaelauv
6. alexott commented on Mar 23, 2022

   

   alexott

   on Mar 23, 2022

   Contributor

   More actions

   Checked #22278 - works as expected

   👍React with 👍1Reacted by Jarek Potiuk

   🚀React with 🚀1Reacted by Jarek Potiuk
7. vincbeck commented on Mar 23, 2022

   

   vincbeck

   on Mar 23, 2022

   Contributor

   More actions

   #22351 Works!

   ❤️React with ❤️1Reacted by Jarek Potiuk
8. josh-fell commented on Mar 23, 2022

   

   josh-fell

   on Mar 23, 2022

   Contributor

   More actions

   #22371 Looks good.

   🎉React with 🎉1Reacted by Jarek Potiuk
9. pierrejeambrun commented on Mar 23, 2022

   

   pierrejeambrun

   on Mar 23, 2022

   Member

   More actions

   #22296 is mostly documentation and looks good. (The docker image was build locally and is working) 👍

   🚀React with 🚀1Reacted by Jarek Potiuk
10. potiuk commented on Mar 25, 2022

    

    potiuk

    on Mar 25, 2022

    MemberAuthor

    More actions

    Few more hourse do do more testing :)
11. ulsc commented on Mar 25, 2022

    

    ulsc

    on Mar 25, 2022

    Contributor

    More actions

    #22219 works.

    🎉React with 🎉1Reacted by Jarek Potiuk
12. potiuk commented on Mar 26, 2022

    

    potiuk

    on Mar 26, 2022

    MemberAuthor

    More actions

    Thanks everyone. All providers are out !

    👍React with 👍1Reacted by Pierre Jeambrun

    🎉React with 🎉1Reacted by Pierre Jeambrun
13. potiuk

    closed this as completedon Mar 26, 2022
14. potiuk

    added

    testing statusStatus of testing releasesStatus of testing releases

    on Mar 28, 2022