Sounds reasonable - maybe a quick POC would be good to show how it could
look like and allowed to assess if there are some back-compat concerns.

On Mon, Jun 29, 2026 at 7:27 AM Amogh Desai <[email protected]> wrote:

> Now that Airflow 3.3 will introduce ResumableJobMixin to make synchronous
> submit and poll operators crash-safe, I wanted to start a discussion.
>
> I came across https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/68936, which brings
> crash recovery/durable exeucution to TriggerDagRunOperator, but it's a case
> which cannot use the mixin. On Airflow 3 the operator's execute() raises
> *DagRunTriggerException*; the actual trigger and the wait loop run in the
> task runner
> (_handle_trigger_dag_run). So the PR reimplements the mixin's three state
> contract (succeeded / reconnect / resubmit) and persist-before-poll by hand
> in the
> runner. This means that we will now have two copies of the same contract
> that can drift.
>
> It cannot use the mixin's contract because it only offloads its execution
> to task runner, and doesn't own it. For more context, the poll primitive
> already exists as a
> user-callable accessor (ti.get_dagrun_state()). The only missing primitive
> is triggering a dag run.
>
> I propose that we revisit this portion. I propose we introduce an execution
> API accessor in task sdk for triggering dagruns, which will be the
> counterpart to the existing
> ti.get_dagrun_state(). It routes through the same execution endpoint the
> runner already uses, so no new authz surface is changed.
>
> This proposal does not expand what task code can do, it just gives a first
> class way to do something already possible. A task JWT can already trigger
> dag runs through the
> Execution API today: that is exactly what DagRunTriggerException does under
> the hood. The proposed *ti.trigger_dag_run()* accessor routes through the
> same endpoint with
> the same scoped token, so the boundary is identical, just reached through a
> clean, supported API instead of an exception side channel.
>
> Happy to hear thoughts from folks.
>
>
> Thanks & Regards,
> Amogh Desai
>

Reply via email to