Hi, Suppose I have assets A,B,C,D. B and C are pro...
# dagster-plus
s
Hi, Suppose I have assets A,B,C,D. B and C are produced by a multi-asset op and the lineage of Asset D is A->B->D. How can I materialize through UI Asset D and all its dependencies? I’m okay when trying to materialize B to materialize C as well.
p
Hi Said. In the asset graph view, you can manually select any number of assets to materialize. You can also use the asset subset selection tool to type in a particular asset and all of its upstream dependencies, and then click
Materialize All
(see the selection string
*asset_d
):
s
I kinda want Assets produced by
multi-Assets
to be wired together, when one is materialized everything is materialized. I don’t want to get this issue when I try to materialize B.
When building job, the AssetsDefinition 'stage' contains asset keys [AssetKey(['B', 'B']), AssetKey(['C', 'C'])], but attempted to select only [AssetKey(['B', 'B'])]
I want it to automatically materialize C as well. I don’t have the intention to do subsetting because one op will produce B and C.
p
I see. We currently don’t support this selection syntax in the UI right now. Do you mind filing an issue in Github as a feature request? cc @sean / @sandy in case I’m missing anything…
s
To clarify more the
multi-asset
outputs
dataset_B
and
dataset_C
. If I go to Assets and search for
dataset_D
and go to its lineage and I click materialize all to materialize
dataset_D
. I would get a failure. My expectations that the
op
stage_a
would run and materialize
dataset_B
and
dataset_C
.
I want to check if this a bug or it is expected, When I click on Materialize all for all upstream Assets my expectations is to run all
ops
that produce a subset or all assets. In this use case, to materialize dataset_A, dataset_B, dataset_C, dataset_D when I go to Asset
dataset_D
lineage and click materialize all
s
hi @Said Mancouri - this is the current expected behavior - we want to err on the side of not accidentally materializing assets that the user hasn't explicitly said should be materialized that said, I think your feedback is reasonable that this is a poor experience. we could replace the error with some sort of warning or confirmation dialog. if you're up for filing an issue, I can punt it over to the UI folks