-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 109
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
Configure Production Image Setup using LocalExecutor #4511
Comments
3 tasks
Draft PR is parked at GSA/datagov-harvester#2 README and other cleanup TBD. |
btylerburton
moved this from 🏗 In Progress [8]
to 👀 Needs Review [2]
in data.gov team board
Nov 17, 2023
PR is here: GSA/datagov-harvester#3 |
github-project-automation
bot
moved this from 👀 Needs Review [2]
to ✔ Done
in data.gov team board
Nov 21, 2023
4 tasks
btylerburton
added
H2.0/orchestrator
and removed
H2.0/Harvest-General
General Harvesting 2.0 Issues
labels
Dec 13, 2023
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
User Story
Datagovteam would like to implement a production quality airflow installation using the LocalExecutor. This is necessary in order to establish a baseline for Airflow performance in Cloud.gov, and will allow us to compare performance against other executors more quantitatively.
Related:
Acceptance Criteria
[ACs should be clearly demoable/verifiable whenever possible. Try specifying them using BDD.]
cf login -a api.fr.cloud.gov --sso
and authenticateAND I run
cf target -o gsa-datagov -s <development|staging|production>
WHEN I run
cf push airflow --vars-file my_vars_file --strategy rolling
THEN I expect to see the instance of the airflow admin panel when I visit the expected cloud.gov internal URL
AND I will see my test DAG loaded here.
Background
Given the overwhelming number of options for configuration, establishing a performance baseline with a LocalExecutor configured for production, with an external RDS DB, will allow us to benchmark other solutions more effectively.
Cloud.gov also supports building applications from images, and given that we work with containers locally and have been traditionally supporting a both an image-to-container solution for local developement and a buildpak-to-container solution for production, then this POC will attempt to unify those two environments.
Security Considerations (required)
[Any security concerns that might be implicated in the change. "None" is OK, just be explicit here!]
Sketch
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: