Apache Airflow is a powerful tool for orchestrating complex workflows, but there are several common anti-patterns that teams should avoid to ensure efficient and maintainable DAGs (Directed Acyclic Graphs). Here are some of the most prevalent anti-patterns:
Using XComs to transfer large amounts of data between tasks can lead to performance issues. Instead, it is advisable to store large data in external systems (like cloud storage) and pass only references (e.g., file paths).
Hardcoding configuration values directly in the DAG can make future changes cumbersome. Instead, utilize environment variables or configuration files to manage these settings.
Not implementing retries or proper error handling can lead to tasks failing silently. Always configure retries and use the on_failure_callback parameter to handle failures effectively.
Running too many tasks concurrently can overload the Airflow scheduler, leading to delays and timeouts. Use the max_active_runs
property to manage concurrency effectively.
Creating intricate dependencies can make DAGs complex and difficult to understand. Aim for simplicity by minimizing dependencies where possible.
How do I avoid rehashing overhead with std::set in multithreaded code?
How do I find elements with custom comparators with std::set for embedded targets?
How do I erase elements while iterating with std::set for embedded targets?
How do I provide stable iteration order with std::unordered_map for large datasets?
How do I reserve capacity ahead of time with std::unordered_map for large datasets?
How do I erase elements while iterating with std::unordered_map in multithreaded code?
How do I provide stable iteration order with std::map for embedded targets?
How do I provide stable iteration order with std::map in multithreaded code?
How do I avoid rehashing overhead with std::map in performance-sensitive code?
How do I merge two containers efficiently with std::map for embedded targets?