FYI I used Dash instead of Local Executor when first starting Airflow, it was a great way to make sure the Executor and Scheduler weren’t tied to each other with no difficulty in set-up. But once I actually started deploying to multiple boxes I needed queue names pretty quickly. So not going to say it's needed but for me it was a helpful stepping stone.
-----Original Message----- From: Ash Berlin-Taylor <a...@apache.org> Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2020 17:38 To: dev@airflow.apache.org Cc: dev@airflow.apache.org Subject: Re: Remove Dask Executor in Airflow 2.0 ? It hasn't been discussed before, but unlike the Mesos one this one was seen a (tiny) bit of activity in 1.10 so at least one person is using it https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/5273 On Jan 12 2020, at 9:05 pm, Jarek Potiuk <jarek.pot...@polidea.com> wrote: > I am finishing the PR on separating integrations and improving our CI > footprint (https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/7091) but during > this change I have found that we have - apparently - dysfunctional > DaskExecutor in Airflow 2.0. > > There is a "test_dask_executor.py" for which all tests are skipped. > And they fail when I try to run the tests. I tried to look for any > reference in devlist archives but I couldn't find anything about it. > > Can someone shed some light on this? Should we remove Dask executor > completely from Airflow 2.0 ? Or should we fix the tests/executor ? > Has it been discussed ? > > J. > > -- > Jarek Potiuk > Polidea <https://www.polidea.com/> | Principal Software Engineer > > M: +48 660 796 129 <+48660796129> > [image: Polidea] <https://www.polidea.com/> > =============================================================================== Please access the attached hyperlink for an important electronic communications disclaimer: http://www.credit-suisse.com/legal/en/disclaimer_email_ib.html ===============================================================================
