Re: execution_date - can we stop the confusion?
I dont think this makes sense and I dont that think anyone had a real issue with this. Execution date has been clearly documented and is part of the core principles of airflow. Renaming will create more confusion.
Please note that I do think that as an anonymous user you cannot speak for any "new airflow user". That is a contradiction to me.
Sent from my iPhone
> On 26 Sep 2018, at 07:59, airflowuser <airflowuser@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx.INVALID> wrote:
> One of the most annoying, hard to understand and against all common sense is the execution_date behavior. I assume that any new Airflow user has been struggling with it.
> The amount of questions with answers referring to : https://airflow.apache.org/scheduler.html?scheduling-triggers is uncountable.
> Most people mistakenly think that execution_date is the datetime which the DAG started to run.
> I suggest the following changes:
> 1. Renaming the execution_date to something else like: run_stamped This name won't cause people to get confused.
> 2. Adding a new variable which indicated the actual datetime when the DAG run was generated. call it execution_start_date. People seem to want the information when the DAG actually started to be executed/run.
> This is only naming changes. No need to actual change the behavior - This will only make things simpler as when user encounter run_stamped he won't be confused by the name like execution_date