Construct task instances with `ExecuteTask.make` for celery executor integration tests by Prab-27 · Pull Request #61311 · apache/airflow

Prab-27 · 2026-02-01T08:46:09Z

This PR adds the required fields using make() classmethod to the Pydantic ExecuteTask class to ensure proper validation

Was generative AI tooling used to co-author this PR?

<

If generative AI tooling has been used in the process of authoring this PR, please
change below checkbox to [X] followed by the name of the tool, uncomment the "Generated-by".
-->

Yes (please specify the tool below)

Read the Pull Request Guidelines for more information. Note: commit author/co-author name and email in commits become permanently public when merged.
For fundamental code changes, an Airflow Improvement Proposal (AIP) is needed.
When adding dependency, check compliance with the ASF 3rd Party License Policy.
For significant user-facing changes create newsfragment: {pr_number}.significant.rst or {issue_number}.significant.rst, in airflow-core/newsfragments.

Prab-27 · 2026-02-01T10:56:00Z

Could you please check whether we need this PR, or if the tests are already resolved?

henry3260 · 2026-02-01T13:38:35Z

I think the current PR title might be confusing. Maybe we can update it to focus on the flaky test test_celery_integration.

bugraoz93 · 2026-02-01T15:23:21Z

We generally use that title for upgrading dependencies from prek, uv on our CI. This looks like indeed related to flaky test since we haven't seen a couple and popped up again
https://github.com/apache/airflow/actions/runs/21563876024

Prab-27 · 2026-02-01T15:59:35Z

I misunderstood the rule about updating the PR title. I thought it meant this, but I see now that’s not right.

bugraoz93

Even though it is in celery, what it generates as model is purely related to TaskSDK and Execution API communication, so I would also like to take @amoghrajesh on this one

@Prab-27, In the short term, as a CI team, we can increase flakiness from 3 to 5 and add a delay between runs with a delay parameter, so we can be more flexible until we have the solution. Please let me know if you can update, or I can also do it

Prab-27 · 2026-02-01T16:49:56Z

@bugraoz93 Okay I'm trying to update it and get back to you

bugraoz93 · 2026-02-01T18:35:42Z

I think your other PR should give us some more time until we are bothered more :) No rush, just wanted to clarify here too

Prab-27 · 2026-02-01T18:59:35Z

Another tests are failing , I'm updating Taskinstance class

Edited : It's wrong thoughts

Prab-27 · 2026-02-01T19:11:49Z

Oops !! Tests are failing due to

airflow/airflow-core/src/airflow/executors/workloads.py

Line 131 in 40f6ec1

ser_ti.parent_context_carrier = ti.dag_run.context_carrier

in make() classmethod

Error Log :

 providers/celery/tests/integration/celery/test_celery_executor.py:202: in test_celery_integration
    workloads.ExecuteTask.make(
airflow-core/src/airflow/executors/workloads.py:131: in make
    ser_ti.parent_context_carrier = ti.dag_run.context_carrier
/usr/python/lib/python3.10/site-packages/pydantic/main.py:1026: in __getattr__
    raise AttributeError(f'{type(self).__name__!r} object has no attribute {item!r}')
E   AttributeError: 'TaskInstance' object has no attribute 'dag_run'

@bugraoz93 Does this fine to use model_construct ? OR any other idea ?

amoghrajesh

Can you follow pattern similar to test_base_executor to fix the CI on this PR: https://github.com/apache/airflow/blob/main/airflow-core/tests/unit/executors/test_base_executor.py#L226-L239

Prab-27 · 2026-02-02T11:35:38Z

Let's see !

I don't understand this - strange behavior.
Why does restart sometimes work and sometimes fail?
If it passes once, then it always passes. If it fails once, then it always fails.

henry3260 · 2026-02-02T11:51:46Z

Let's see !

I don't understand this - strange behavior.

Why does restart sometimes work and sometimes fail?

If it passes once, then it always passes. If it fails once, then it always fails.

Not always — sometimes concurrency issues, network instability, or infrastructure hiccups can cause the test to be flaky.

amoghrajesh

Looks good, preemptive approval assuming nits are handled.

bugraoz93

Nice! Thanks @Prab-27 !

…integration tests (apache#61311)

Prab-27 requested review from dheerajturaga and hussein-awala as code owners February 1, 2026 08:46

boring-cyborg Bot added area:providers provider:celery labels Feb 1, 2026

bugraoz93 changed the title ~~[main] Upgrade important CI environment~~ Add params to model_construct for flaky clery test Feb 1, 2026

bugraoz93 reviewed Feb 1, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread providers/celery/tests/integration/celery/test_celery_executor.py Outdated

bugraoz93 requested a review from amoghrajesh February 1, 2026 16:12

Prab-27 mentioned this pull request Feb 1, 2026

Update delay-time in celery flaky-test #61325

Merged

1 task

Prab-27 force-pushed the up-checks-main branch from ceb7e59 to b908b59 Compare February 1, 2026 18:18

amoghrajesh reviewed Feb 2, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread providers/celery/tests/integration/celery/test_celery_executor.py

Prab-27 force-pushed the up-checks-main branch from b908b59 to fa7b59a Compare February 2, 2026 11:22

Prab-27 changed the title ~~Add params to model_construct for flaky clery test~~ Add params for flaky celery test Feb 2, 2026

amoghrajesh approved these changes Feb 2, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread providers/celery/tests/integration/celery/test_celery_executor.py Outdated

Prab-27 added 4 commits February 2, 2026 07:20

add required field in Execute class

1865bb8

use make() class method instead of model_construct

8d6bcbe

use dag_run that returns ti

081a2ba

update function name

fae96ae

Prab-27 force-pushed the up-checks-main branch from fa7b59a to fae96ae Compare February 2, 2026 15:25

bugraoz93 approved these changes Feb 2, 2026

View reviewed changes

amoghrajesh assigned Prab-27 Feb 2, 2026

amoghrajesh merged commit 784e1a9 into apache:main Feb 2, 2026
86 checks passed

amoghrajesh changed the title ~~Add params for flaky celery test~~ Construct task instances with ExecuteTask.make for celery executor integration tests Feb 2, 2026

amoghrajesh changed the title ~~Construct task instances with ExecuteTask.make for celery executor integration tests~~ Construct task instances with ExecuteTask.make for celery executor integration tests Feb 2, 2026

jason810496 pushed a commit to abhijeets25012-tech/airflow that referenced this pull request Feb 3, 2026

Construct task instances with ExecuteTask.make for celery executor …

9c04615

…integration tests (apache#61311)

Alok-kumar-priyadarshi pushed a commit to Alok-kumar-priyadarshi/airflow that referenced this pull request Feb 5, 2026

Construct task instances with ExecuteTask.make for celery executor …

074daaf

…integration tests (apache#61311)

jhgoebbert pushed a commit to jhgoebbert/airflow_Owen-CH-Leung that referenced this pull request Feb 8, 2026

Construct task instances with ExecuteTask.make for celery executor …

bf73016

…integration tests (apache#61311)

Ratasa143 pushed a commit to Ratasa143/airflow that referenced this pull request Feb 15, 2026

Construct task instances with ExecuteTask.make for celery executor …

5527d64

…integration tests (apache#61311)

choo121600 pushed a commit to choo121600/airflow that referenced this pull request Feb 22, 2026

Construct task instances with ExecuteTask.make for celery executor …

3afc147

…integration tests (apache#61311)

Subham-KRLX pushed a commit to Subham-KRLX/airflow that referenced this pull request Mar 4, 2026

Construct task instances with ExecuteTask.make for celery executor …

a9e044c

…integration tests (apache#61311)

Ankurdeewan pushed a commit to Ankurdeewan/airflow that referenced this pull request Mar 15, 2026

Construct task instances with ExecuteTask.make for celery executor …

d6f79db

…integration tests (apache#61311)

Uh oh!

Conversation

Prab-27 commented Feb 1, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Was generative AI tooling used to co-author this PR?

Uh oh!

Prab-27 commented Feb 1, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

henry3260 commented Feb 1, 2026

Uh oh!

bugraoz93 commented Feb 1, 2026

Uh oh!

Prab-27 commented Feb 1, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

bugraoz93 left a comment • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Prab-27 commented Feb 1, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

bugraoz93 commented Feb 1, 2026

Uh oh!

Prab-27 commented Feb 1, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Prab-27 commented Feb 1, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

amoghrajesh left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Prab-27 commented Feb 2, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

henry3260 commented Feb 2, 2026

Uh oh!

amoghrajesh left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

bugraoz93 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

Prab-27 commented Feb 1, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Prab-27 commented Feb 1, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Prab-27 commented Feb 1, 2026 •

edited

Loading

bugraoz93 left a comment •

edited

Loading

Prab-27 commented Feb 1, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Prab-27 commented Feb 1, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Prab-27 commented Feb 1, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Prab-27 commented Feb 2, 2026 •

edited

Loading