Skip to content

Conversation

@amoghrajesh
Copy link
Contributor

@amoghrajesh amoghrajesh commented Sep 10, 2025

Why?

Yesterday while trying to release beta1 for 3.1, @kaxil ran into this error: #55443. This was an issue where none of the "airflow cli" commands worked, the impact of this is that new users would probably struggle to onboard.

What?

Adding a CI job that can run "airflow standalone". This job validates that the airflow standalone command can start successfully without hanging or crashing, providing early detection of critical startup issues in the basic CI workflow.

Exit criteria:

  • If airflow standalone exits with non-zero code or times out, the CI job fails
  • Tested locally and in CI environment

^ 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.rst or {issue_number}.significant.rst, in airflow-core/newsfragments.

@boring-cyborg boring-cyborg bot added area:dev-tools backport-to-v3-1-test Mark PR with this label to backport to v3-1-test branch labels Sep 10, 2025
@amoghrajesh amoghrajesh changed the title Ci for standalone Add CI job to test airflow standalone startup Sep 10, 2025
@amoghrajesh amoghrajesh marked this pull request as ready for review September 10, 2025 14:55
@amoghrajesh amoghrajesh self-assigned this Sep 10, 2025
@amoghrajesh amoghrajesh reopened this Sep 10, 2025
@amoghrajesh
Copy link
Contributor Author

Right, I seem to have it run as I expect it to

Copy link
Member

@ashb ashb left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

How long does this take to run? I can't recall off the top of my head when the basic tests workflow is run, but is this perhaps going to run too often or to early?

@amoghrajesh
Copy link
Contributor Author

How long does this take to run? I can't recall off the top of my head when the basic tests workflow is run, but is this perhaps going to run too often or to early?

It takes just short of a minute to run
image

And the current cadence is per commit, but if its that short I would be OK with that?

Copy link
Contributor

@jscheffl jscheffl left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Cool! Do we also jneed to adjust selective checks or would this run only in canary?

@amoghrajesh
Copy link
Contributor Author

@jscheffl its not just the scheduler, its runs there and in the PR too

Copy link
Member

@potiuk potiuk left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Nice. One nit -> I think with cat we will show the log twice if it fails - once when running and second time when it fails.

@potiuk
Copy link
Member

potiuk commented Sep 11, 2025

And the current cadence is per commit, but if its that short I would be OK with that?

Yep. Not a big overhead at all.

@amoghrajesh
Copy link
Contributor Author

Nice. One nit -> I think with cat we will show the log twice if it fails - once when running and second time when it fails.

Its probably good to show it while running due to the tee, let me remove the cat actually.

Copy link
Member

@gopidesupavan gopidesupavan left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Nice:)

@amoghrajesh amoghrajesh removed the backport-to-v3-1-test Mark PR with this label to backport to v3-1-test branch label Sep 11, 2025
@amoghrajesh
Copy link
Contributor Author

No need to backport this

@amoghrajesh amoghrajesh merged commit 897d0bf into apache:main Sep 11, 2025
109 checks passed
suman-himanshu pushed a commit to suman-himanshu/airflow that referenced this pull request Sep 17, 2025
Brunda10 pushed a commit to Brunda10/airflow that referenced this pull request Sep 17, 2025
abdulrahman305 bot pushed a commit to abdulrahman305/airflow that referenced this pull request Sep 30, 2025
abdulrahman305 bot pushed a commit to abdulrahman305/airflow that referenced this pull request Oct 1, 2025
abdulrahman305 bot pushed a commit to abdulrahman305/airflow that referenced this pull request Oct 2, 2025
abdulrahman305 bot pushed a commit to abdulrahman305/airflow that referenced this pull request Oct 3, 2025
abdulrahman305 bot pushed a commit to abdulrahman305/airflow that referenced this pull request Oct 4, 2025
abdulrahman305 bot pushed a commit to abdulrahman305/airflow that referenced this pull request Oct 5, 2025
abdulrahman305 bot pushed a commit to abdulrahman305/airflow that referenced this pull request Oct 5, 2025
abdulrahman305 bot pushed a commit to abdulrahman305/airflow that referenced this pull request Oct 7, 2025
abdulrahman305 bot pushed a commit to abdulrahman305/airflow that referenced this pull request Oct 8, 2025
abdulrahman305 bot pushed a commit to abdulrahman305/airflow that referenced this pull request Oct 9, 2025
abdulrahman305 bot pushed a commit to abdulrahman305/airflow that referenced this pull request Oct 10, 2025
abdulrahman305 bot pushed a commit to abdulrahman305/airflow that referenced this pull request Oct 11, 2025
abdulrahman305 bot pushed a commit to abdulrahman305/airflow that referenced this pull request Oct 12, 2025
abdulrahman305 bot pushed a commit to abdulrahman305/airflow that referenced this pull request Oct 14, 2025
abdulrahman305 bot pushed a commit to abdulrahman305/airflow that referenced this pull request Oct 15, 2025
abdulrahman305 bot pushed a commit to abdulrahman305/airflow that referenced this pull request Oct 17, 2025
abdulrahman305 bot pushed a commit to abdulrahman305/airflow that referenced this pull request Oct 19, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants