I have the pipeline below. On my 2nd level of tasks (first paralel tasks) I write a Xcom with some ID, then in the 3rd (2nd col. in paralel) and 4th column of tasks (3rd in paralel) I retrieve the xcoms I wrote in column two. The problem is that since it's writing 6 tasks at the same time, the XCOM that sticks in the end is the last one that was written.
Is there a way for me to make these Xcoms work in parallel? by now because of this problem I have to run all of theses tasks linearly, so the xcoms work correctly...
Image can be seen here:
https://i.stack.imgur.com/aXFWz.png
Related
I'm looking for examples of patterns in place for event-driven DAGs, specifically those with dependencies on other DAGs. Let's start with a simple example:
dag_a -> dag_b
dag_b depends on dag_a. I understand that at the end of dag_a I can add a trigger to launch dag_b. However, this philosophically feels misaligned from an abstraction standpoint: dag_a does not need to understand or know that dag_b exists, yet this pattern would enforce the responsibility of calling dag_b on dag_a.
Let's consider a slightly more complex example (pardon my poor ASCII drawing skills):
dag_a ------> dag_c
/
dag_b --/
In this case, if dag_c depends on both dag_a and dag_b. I understand that we could set up a sensor for the output of each dag_a and dag_b, but with the advent of deferrable operators, it doesn't seem that this remains a best practice. I suppose I'm wondering how to set up a DAG of DAGs in an async fashion.
The potential for deferrable operators for event-driven DAGs is introduced in Astronomer's guide here: https://www.astronomer.io/guides/deferrable-operators, but it's unclear how it would be best applied these in light of the above examples.
More concretely, I'm envisioning a use case where multiple DAGs run every day (so they share the same run date), and the output of each DAG is a date partition in a table somewhere. Downstream DAGs consume the partitions of the upstream tables, so we want to schedule them such that downstream DAGs don't attempt to run before the upstream ones complete.
Right now I'm using a "fail fast and often" approach in downstream dags, where they start running at the scheduled date, but first check if the data they need exists upstream, and if not the task fails. I have these tasks set to retry every x interval, with high number of retries (e.g. retry every hour for 24 hours, if it's still not there then something is wrong and the DAG fails). This is fine since 1) it works for the most part and 2) I don't believe the failed tasks continue to occupy a worker slot between retries, so it actually is somewhat async (I could be wrong). It's just a little crude, so I'm imagining there is a better way.
Any tactical advice for how to set this relationship up to be more event driven while still benefitting from the async nature of deferrable operators is welcome.
we are using an event bus to connect the DAGs, the end task of a DAG will send the event out, and followed DAG will be triggered in the orchestrator according to the event type.
Starting from Airflow 2.4 you can use data-aware scheduling. It would look like this:
dag_a_finished = Dataset("dag_a_finished")
with DAG(dag_id="dag_a", ...):
# Last task in dag_a
BashOperator(task_id="final", outlets=[dag_a_finished], ...)
with DAG(dag_id="dag_b", schedule=[dag_a_finished], ...):
...
with DAG(dag_id="dag_c", schedule=[dag_a_finished], ...):
...
In theory Dataset should represent some piece of data, but technically nothing prevents you from making it just a string identifier used for setting up DAG dependency - just like in above example.
cleanup_pbp is downstream of all 4 of load_pbp_30629, load_pbp_30630, load_to_bq_30629, load_to_bq_30630. cleanup_pbp started at 2021-12-05T08:54:48.
however, load_pbp_30630, one of the 4 upstream tasks, did not end until 2021-12-05T09:02:23.
How is cleanup_pbp running before load_pbp_30630 ends? I've never seen this before. I know our task dependencies have a bit of criss-cross going on, but that shouldn't explain why the tasks run out of order?
We have exactly the same problem and after checking, finally we found out that the problem is caused by the loop function in Dag script.
Actually we use a for loop to create tasks as well as their relationships. As in each iteration it will create the upstream task and the downstream task (like the cleanup_pbp in your case) and always give the same id to downstream one and define its relations (ex. Load_pbp_xxx >> cleanup_pbp), in graph or tree view it considers this downstream id has serval dependences but when Dag runs it takes only the relation defined in the last iteration. If you check Task Instance you will see only one task in its upstream_list.
The solution is to move the definition of this final task out of the loop but keep the definition of dependencies inside the loop. This well resolves our problem of running order, the final task won’t start until all dependences are finished. (with tigger rule all_success of course)
I’m not sure if you are in the same situation as us but hope this will give you some idea.
We are using airflow 2.00. I am trying to implement a DAG that does two things:
Trigger Reports via API
Download reports from source to destination.
There needs to at least 2-3 hours gap between tasks 1 and 2. From my research I two options
Two DAGs for two tasks. Schedule the 2nd DAG two hour apart from 1st DAG
Delay between two tasks as mentioned here
Is there a preference between the two options. Is there a 3rd option with Airflow 2.0? Please advise.
The other option would be to have a sensor waiting for the report to be present. You can utilise reschedule mode of sensors to free up workers slots.
generate_report = GenerateOperator(...)
wait_for_report = WaitForReportSensor(mode='reschedule', poke_interval=5 * 60, ...)
donwload_report = DonwloadReportOperator(...)
generate_report >> wait_for_report >> donwload_report
A third option would be to use a sensor between two tasks that waits for a report to become ready. An off-the-shelf one if there is one for your source, or a custom one that subclasses the base sensor.
The first two options are different implementations of a fixed waiting time. Two problems with it: 1. What if the report is still not ready after the predefined time? 2. Unnecessary waiting if the report is ready earlier.
In airflow, the default configuration seems to be to queue up tasks, in parallel, across days--from one day to the next.
However, if I spin this process up across, say, two years, then the airflow dag will churn through preliminary processes first, across all days, rather than taking, say, 4 days forward from start to finish concurrently.
How do I toggle airflow to execute tasks according to a depth first paradigm rather than a breadth first paradigm?
I have come across a similar situation. I used the following trick to achieve that depth-first behaviour.
Assign all tasks of your DAG to a single pool (with limited number of slots like, say, 20-30)
Set weight_rule=upstream to all the above tasks
Explaination
The UPSTREAM weight_rule reverses prioritization of tasks based on their position across breadth of workflow, resulting in all downstream tasks to have a higher priority than upstream tasks.
This would ensure that whatever branches are launched will go onto completion before next branch is picked, thereby achieving that depth-first behaviour
Try to toggle with the parallelism and max_active_runs parameters in your airflow.cfg and the concurrency parameter at your DAGs.
How to run airflow dag for specified number of times?
I tried using TriggerDagRunOperator, This operators works for me.
In callable function we can check states and decide to continue or not.
However the current count and states needs to be maintained.
Using above approach I am able to repeat DAG 'run'.
Need expert opinion, Is there is any other profound way to run Airflow DAG for X number of times?
Thanks.
I'm afraid that Airflow is ENTIRELY about time based scheduling.
You can set a schedule to None and then use the API to trigger runs, but you'd be doing that externally, and thus maintaining the counts and states that determine when and why to trigger externally.
When you say that your DAG may have 5 tasks which you want to run 10 times and a run takes 2 hours and you cannot schedule it based on time, this is confusing. We have no idea what the significance of 2 hours is to you, or why it must be 10 runs, nor why you cannot schedule it to run those 5 tasks once a day. With a simple daily schedule it would run once a day at approximately the same time, and it won't matter that it takes a little longer than 2 hours on any given day. Right?
You could set the start_date to 11 days ago (a fixed date though, don't set it dynamically), and the end_date to today (also fixed) and then add a daily schedule_interval and a max_active_runs of 1 and you'll get exactly 10 runs and it'll run them back to back without overlapping while changing the execution_date accordingly, then stop. Or you could just use airflow backfill with a None scheduled DAG and a range of execution datetimes.
Do you mean that you want it to run every 2 hours continuously, but sometimes it will be running longer and you don't want it to overlap runs? Well, you definitely can schedule it to run every 2 hours (0 0/2 * * *) and set the max_active_runs to 1, so that if the prior run hasn't finished the next run will wait then kick off when the prior one has completed. See the last bullet in https://airflow.apache.org/faq.html#why-isn-t-my-task-getting-scheduled.
If you want your DAG to run exactly every 2 hours on the dot [give or take some scheduler lag, yes that's a thing] and to leave the prior run going, that's mostly the default behavior, but you could add depends_on_past to some of the important tasks that themselves shouldn't be run concurrently (like creating, inserting to, or dropping a temp table), or use a pool with a single slot.
There isn't any feature to kill the prior run if your next schedule is ready to start. It might be possible to skip the current run if the prior one hasn't completed yet, but I forget how that's done exactly.
That's basically most of your options there. Also you could create manual dag_runs for an unscheduled DAG; creating 10 at a time when you feel like (using the UI or CLI instead of the API, but the API might be easier).
Do any of these suggestions address your concerns? Because it's not clear why you want a fixed number of runs, how frequently, or with what schedule and conditions, it's difficult to provide specific recommendations.
This functionality isn't natively supported by Airflow
But by exploiting the meta-db, we can cook-up this functionality ourselves
we can write a custom-operator / python operator
before running the actual computation, check if 'n' runs for the task (TaskInstance table) already exist in meta-db. (Refer to task_command.py for help)
and if they do, just skip the task (raise AirflowSkipException, reference)
This excellent article can be used for inspiration: Use apache airflow to run task exactly once
Note
The downside of this approach is that it assumes historical runs of task (TaskInstances) would forever be preserved (and correctly)
in practise though, I've often found task_instances to be missing (we have catchup set to False)
furthermore, on large Airflow deployments, one might need to setup routinal cleanup of meta-db, which would make this approach impossible