Quick question about using dynamic workflows with the imperative style

create_node()

. We have a bunch of

@tasks

which have dependencies on one another, but they are not explicit (nothing is returned or passed in). We can easily use the imperative style to define the order of the tasks in a regular

@workflow

. Does the imperative style also work for

@dynamic

workflows?

Hello @Mike Zhong!

create_node()

works with

@dynamic

. It doesn’t work locally cause a dynamic workflow is treated as a task during a local execution; however, it should work on the sandbox and Flyte backend. cc: @Yee, should we add the support for local runs?

oh sorry missed this. yes we should try to add support for local runs, though i’m not sure how feasible that is. it’s not easy because for the basic imperative case, you start out by declaring an

ImperativeWorkflow

object. In the dynamic case, I’m not sure how you’d distinguish between a normal task and an imperative one.

I believe @Mike Zhong is referring to

create_node()

but not the actual

ImperativeWorkflow

. I tested this specific use case out by including

create_node()

within

@dynamic

. It didn’t work locally but worked on sandbox. If we’re talking about

ImperativeWorkflow

, are you asking if we’ve tested this locally as a dynamic workflow? How will we do that?

no sorry i just mean using create node.

Yeah, so it didn’t work locally but sandbox is all good.

i wonder if it’s possible to be able to create an imperative workflow inside a dynamic task, and then () it

thanks for the info, I had tried it locally before and it didn’t work but if it works with remote execution, that is good enough