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

Fix deferrable mode for BeamRunJavaPipelineOperator #49

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

MaksYermak
Copy link
Collaborator


^ 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 newsfragments.

@@ -606,22 +606,6 @@ def execute_sync(self, context: Context):
)

async def execute_async(self, context: Context):
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Given that you've removed asyncio loop from the execute_async method, does it still need to be an async method?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

A good note I think not. I will check the code and refactor it if it is needed.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@e-galan I have updated the code. Could you please check one more time?

@MaksYermak MaksYermak force-pushed the fix-defer-mode-beam-java-operator branch from 91dbd70 to 9e144be Compare April 30, 2024 10:46
@MaksYermak MaksYermak closed this May 2, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants