Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

execution date is missing from Task Instance tooltip #32503

Closed
1 of 2 tasks
renzepost opened this issue Jul 10, 2023 · 5 comments · Fixed by #32527
Closed
1 of 2 tasks

execution date is missing from Task Instance tooltip #32503

renzepost opened this issue Jul 10, 2023 · 5 comments · Fixed by #32527
Assignees
Labels
area:core area:UI Related to UI/UX. For Frontend Developers. good first issue kind:feature Feature Requests

Comments

@renzepost
Copy link
Contributor

renzepost commented Jul 10, 2023

Apache Airflow version

main (development)

What happened

It seems this commit has made the task instance execution date disappear from the task instance tooltip completely:
image
Note the missing Run: <execution date> between Task_id and Run_id.
I think there's a problem with the task instance execution date, because it's always undefined. In an older version of Airflow (2.4.3), I can see that the tooltip always shows the current datetime instead of the actual execution date, which is what the author of the commit identified in the first place I think.

What you think should happen instead

The tooltip should properly show the task instance's execution date, not the current datetime (or nothing). There's a deeper problem here that causes ti.execution_date to be undefined.

How to reproduce

Run the main branch of Airflow, with a simple DAG that finishes a run successfully. Go to the Graph view of a DAG and hover over any completed task with the mouse.

Operating System

Ubuntu 22.04

Versions of Apache Airflow Providers

No response

Deployment

Virtualenv installation

Deployment details

No response

Anything else

No response

Are you willing to submit PR?

  • Yes I am willing to submit a PR!

Code of Conduct

@renzepost renzepost added area:core kind:bug This is a clearly a bug needs-triage label for new issues that we didn't triage yet labels Jul 10, 2023
@boring-cyborg
Copy link

boring-cyborg bot commented Jul 10, 2023

Thanks for opening your first issue here! Be sure to follow the issue template! If you are willing to raise PR to address this issue please do so, no need to wait for approval.

@utkarsharma2 utkarsharma2 added area:UI Related to UI/UX. For Frontend Developers. and removed kind:bug This is a clearly a bug needs-triage label for new issues that we didn't triage yet labels Jul 11, 2023
@utkarsharma2
Copy link
Contributor

@renzepost You can refer to run_id after manual__ as it's basically the same information as exetution_date which was changed in the PR - #17719

@utkarsharma2
Copy link
Contributor

utkarsharma2 commented Jul 11, 2023

Based on the Slack thread - https://apache-airflow.slack.com/archives/CCWHRNBK7/p1689064000858439

Summary on the thread - Since a user can override the run_id it is not reliable to lean on run_id always, for the same reason we can introduce another field in taskinstancelogical_date which can hold this information and display it in UI.

PR to override run_id - #21851

@utkarsharma2 utkarsharma2 reopened this Jul 11, 2023
@utkarsharma2 utkarsharma2 added the kind:feature Feature Requests label Jul 11, 2023
@tirkarthi
Copy link
Contributor

The task instance is converted to dict using alchemy_to_dict but execution_date is not a column and a proxy to task_instance. So after forming the dict execution_date attribute value can be updated in the dict. I can raise a PR for this.

return alchemy_to_dict(task_instance)

@utkarsharma2
Copy link
Contributor

@tirkarthi Sure assigned it to you.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
area:core area:UI Related to UI/UX. For Frontend Developers. good first issue kind:feature Feature Requests
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

4 participants