-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.6k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Extend the DSL to implement the design of #801 #926
Merged
k8s-ci-robot
merged 12 commits into
kubeflow:master
from
arrikto:pr-feature-dsl-volumes
Apr 25, 2019
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
12 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
0135935
SDK: Create BaseOp class
elikatsis 127ce17
SDK: In preparation for the new feature ResourceOps (#801)
elikatsis 7a8379f
SDK: Simplify the consumption of Volumes by ContainerOps
elikatsis b1474ac
SDK: Add ResourceOp
elikatsis 67a4875
SDK: Simplify the creation of PersistentVolumeClaim instances
elikatsis b10e9bf
SDK: Emit a V1Volume as `.volume` from dsl.VolumeOp
elikatsis 6ac42d4
SDK: Add PipelineVolume
elikatsis 6918988
SDK: Simplify the creation of VolumeSnapshot instances
elikatsis 627ecd6
Extend UI for the ResourceOp and Volumes feature of the Compiler
elikatsis 3f81781
Cleaning up the diff (before moving things back)
Ark-kun 4910e2f
Renamed op.deps back to op.dependent_names
Ark-kun 0b9081f
Moved Container, Sidecar and BaseOp classed back to _container_op.py
Ark-kun File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
One more overall comment: Is it possible to implement something that would work even if a pipeline step is used multiple times? In this case, one execution should not override the data written by another.
For example, Ning is planning to add loop support: https://docs.google.com/document/d/12KHoEGe3o-i2WyzaU2JPXp3GQL3_BavGuh-KYBMUdQ8/edit?ts=5c5b2627#heading=h.bhvs46afvzxg
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@vicaire
I will amend the design doc in #801 so we use
PipelineParam
instances in the K8s resource specs referred to byPipelineVolume
andPipelineVolumeSnapshot
instances. This should make them usable in loops.We don't have access to an implementation of loops yet, so we cannot verify our code, but we are confident this will work, based on our use of
PipelineParam
instances. Let's talk more about it in #801, if you feel there is something that can cause problems with your implementation.