Repository navigation
Remove Legacy Query Object Usage from airflow-models - #52325
Merged
uranusjr merged 36 commits intoSep 2, 2025
Merged
Conversation
Prab-27
requested review from
XD-DENG,
amoghrajesh,
ashb,
bolkedebruin,
bugraoz93,
ephraimbuddy,
jason810496,
kaxil,
pierrejeambrun,
rawwar and
shubhamraj-git
as code owners
June 27, 2025 07:41
boring-cyborg
Bot
added
area:API
Prab-27
force-pushed
the
remove-session-query-from-airflow-models
branch
from
June 28, 2025 09:28
72b046a to
67e0627
Compare
jason810496
reviewed
Jun 29, 2025
jason810496
left a comment
jason810496
left a comment
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for the PR! Could you help to make the CI green?
Contributor
Author
|
Converting into draft until green checks |
Prab-27
marked this pull request as draft
June 30, 2025 14:39
Prab-27
force-pushed
the
remove-session-query-from-airflow-models
branch
from
June 30, 2025 14:42
67e0627 to
bc302b0
Compare
Prab-27
force-pushed
the
remove-session-query-from-airflow-models
branch
from
July 5, 2025 17:41
4910c67 to
bd99c84
Compare
Prab-27
commented
Jul 5, 2025
Prab-27
force-pushed
the
remove-session-query-from-airflow-models
branch
2 times, most recently
from
July 21, 2025 17:10
335c872 to
34b3863
Compare
Prab-27
force-pushed
the
remove-session-query-from-airflow-models
branch
4 times, most recently
from
August 3, 2025 03:49
3fe6087 to
00158d5
Compare
Prab-27
force-pushed
the
remove-session-query-from-airflow-models
branch
from
September 2, 2025 12:24
98ed7a3 to
432672c
Compare
jason810496
approved these changes
Sep 2, 2025
Member
|
#protm Thank you again for your consistent work @Prab-27. |
Contributor
Author
|
Thanks a lot for reviewing this PR—I'm working on the next step and excited to contribute more! |
Contributor
Author
|
One remaining Query-related section—I'll address it soon |
45 of 74 tasks
1 task done
pierrejeambrun
added a commit
to astronomer/airflow
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 8, 2026
Two more callers of ``session.scalars(...).first()`` / ``session.execute(select(...)).first()`` were still missing an explicit ``.limit(1)``. Because SQLAlchemy 2.0's ``Result.first()`` does not add one (unlike the legacy ``Query.first``), each call sends every matching row to the Python process and discards all but the first. The favorite existence check is bounded to a single row per (dag_id, user_id) by the schema, but the previous-TI lookup scans every earlier matching TI. Introduced independently of apache#52325's migration: get_previous_task_instance came in apache#59712, unfavorite_dag's existence probe in apache#51264. Same anti-pattern as the four sites apache#72554 fixes; the tests reuse the ``capture_orm_selects`` helper that PR introduces.
pierrejeambrun
added a commit
to astronomer/airflow
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 8, 2026
Two more callers of ``session.scalars(...).first()`` / ``session.execute(select(...)).first()`` were still missing an explicit ``.limit(1)``. Because SQLAlchemy 2.0's ``Result.first()`` does not add one (unlike the legacy ``Query.first``), each call sends every matching row to the Python process and discards all but the first. The favorite existence check is bounded to a single row per (dag_id, user_id) by the schema, but the previous-TI lookup scans every earlier matching TI. Introduced independently of apache#52325's migration: get_previous_task_instance came in apache#59712, unfavorite_dag's existence probe in apache#51264. Same anti-pattern as the four sites apache#72554 fixes; the tests reuse the ``capture_orm_selects`` helper that PR introduces.
pierrejeambrun
added a commit
to astronomer/airflow
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 9, 2026
Two more callers of ``session.scalars(...).first()`` / ``session.execute(select(...)).first()`` were still missing an explicit ``.limit(1)``. Because SQLAlchemy 2.0's ``Result.first()`` does not add one (unlike the legacy ``Query.first``), each call sends every matching row to the Python process and discards all but the first. The favorite existence check is bounded to a single row per (dag_id, user_id) by the schema, but the previous-TI lookup scans every earlier matching TI. Introduced independently of apache#52325's migration: get_previous_task_instance came in apache#59712, unfavorite_dag's existence probe in apache#51264. Same anti-pattern as the four sites apache#72554 fixes; the tests reuse the ``capture_orm_selects`` helper that PR introduces.
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
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.
Related discussion: here
This PR is part of the migration to SQLAlchemy 2.0
Replaced instances of session.query() with select() constructs
Updated methods like XComModel.get_many to return Select objects instead of Query objects
Adjusted dependent code to reflect the updated return types
^ 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 airflow-core/newsfragments.