Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Airflow vs Luigi: What are the differences?
- Programming Language: Airflow is written in Python whereas Luigi is written in Python.
- Framework: Airflow uses a directed acyclic graph (DAG) to define and orchestrate workflows, allowing users to create complex workflows by defining tasks and their dependencies. Luigi, on the other hand, also uses a DAG-like structure to define workflows but focuses more on simplicity and ease of use.
- Ecosystem: Airflow has a larger ecosystem and community support compared to Luigi, which means users can benefit from a wider range of plugins and integrations available for use within Airflow. Luigi has a smaller ecosystem but is known for its tight integration with other Python libraries and tools.
- Scalability: Airflow is designed to scale horizontally, allowing users to easily handle large volumes of data and perform distributed processing. Luigi is also scalable but may require additional configuration and setup to handle larger workloads.
- Monitoring and Alerting: Airflow provides robust monitoring and alerting capabilities, allowing users to track the progress of their workflows, set up notifications, and handle failures. Luigi, on the other hand, provides basic monitoring features but may require additional tools or customizations for advanced monitoring and alerting.
- Workflow Visualization: Airflow provides a graphical interface to view and visualize workflows, making it easy to understand the structure and dependencies of tasks. Luigi also provides a visualization feature but it is more limited compared to Airflow's interface.
In Summary, Airflow and Luigi are both powerful workflow orchestration tools, but Airflow has a larger ecosystem, advanced monitoring capabilities, and a more extensive workflow visualization interface, while Luigi focuses on simplicity, tight Python integration, and ease of use.
I am so confused. I need a tool that will allow me to go to about 10 different URLs to get a list of objects. Those object lists will be hundreds or thousands in length. I then need to get detailed data lists about each object. Those detailed data lists can have hundreds of elements that could be map/reduced somehow. My batch process dies sometimes halfway through which means hours of processing gone, i.e. time wasted. I need something like a directed graph that will keep results of successful data collection and allow me either pragmatically or manually to retry the failed ones some way (0 - forever) times. I want it to then process all the ones that have succeeded or been effectively ignored and load the data store with the aggregation of some couple thousand data-points. I know hitting this many endpoints is not a good practice but I can't put collectors on all the endpoints or anything like that. It is pretty much the only way to get the data.
For a non-streaming approach:
You could consider using more checkpoints throughout your spark jobs. Furthermore, you could consider separating your workload into multiple jobs with an intermittent data store (suggesting cassandra or you may choose based on your choice and availability) to store results , perform aggregations and store results of those.
Spark Job 1 - Fetch Data From 10 URLs and store data and metadata in a data store (cassandra) Spark Job 2..n - Check data store for unprocessed items and continue the aggregation
Alternatively for a streaming approach: Treating your data as stream might be useful also. Spark Streaming allows you to utilize a checkpoint interval - https://spark.apache.org/docs/latest/streaming-programming-guide.html#checkpointing
Pros of Airflow
- Features53
- Task Dependency Management14
- Beautiful UI12
- Cluster of workers12
- Extensibility10
- Open source6
- Complex workflows5
- Python5
- Good api3
- Apache project3
- Custom operators3
- Dashboard2
Pros of Luigi
- Hadoop Support5
- Python3
- Open soure1
Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions
Cons of Airflow
- Observability is not great when the DAGs exceed 2502
- Running it on kubernetes cluster relatively complex2
- Open source - provides minimum or no support2
- Logical separation of DAGs is not straight forward1