Skip to content
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

feat/update mlflow-related sample scripts #12471

Open
wants to merge 52 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

yoonhyejin
Copy link
Collaborator

Checklist

  • The PR conforms to DataHub's Contributing Guideline (particularly Commit Message Format)
  • Links to related issues (if applicable)
  • Tests for the changes have been added/updated (if applicable)
  • Docs related to the changes have been added/updated (if applicable). If a new feature has been added a Usage Guide has been added for the same.
  • For any breaking change/potential downtime/deprecation/big changes an entry has been made in Updating DataHub

@github-actions github-actions bot added ingestion PR or Issue related to the ingestion of metadata product PR or Issue related to the DataHub UI/UX smoke_test Contains changes related to smoke tests labels Jan 27, 2025
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 27, 2025

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 81.81818% with 6 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
...b/api/entities/dataprocess/dataprocess_instance.py 81.81% 6 Missing ⚠️

❌ Your patch check has failed because the patch coverage (81.81%) is below the target coverage (90.00%). You can increase the patch coverage or adjust the target coverage.

Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
.../dataProcessInstance/DataProcessInstanceEntity.tsx 30.47% <ø> (+0.25%) ⬆️
...b-web-react/src/app/preview/DefaultPreviewCard.tsx 91.82% <ø> (ø)
...b/api/entities/dataprocess/dataprocess_instance.py 72.14% <81.81%> (+2.41%) ⬆️

... and 34 files with indirect coverage changes


Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 47134c2...83bd12c. Read the comment docs.

@datahub-cyborg datahub-cyborg bot added the needs-review Label for PRs that need review from a maintainer. label Jan 27, 2025
@ryota-cloud ryota-cloud requested review from ryota-cloud and removed request for ryota-cloud January 27, 2025 17:10
# Create model group
model_group_urn = client.create_model_group(
group_id="airline_forecast_models_group",
properties=models.MLModelGroupPropertiesClass(
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

better abstraction! also how about putting detail of properties class into create_model_group method ? then customer doesn't have to know properties class. (but I'd like to know pros/cons of doing it )

),
)

run_urn = client.create_training_run(
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

this method make abstraction better!

  • nit on naming, create_run is shorter? (unless run is overloaded term) or experiment_run ?
  • how about allowing to put experiment_urn in argument, then create run-> experiment relationship automaticaly? (then user do not call add_run_to_experiment)

)

# Creating a model with property classes
model_urn = client.create_model(
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

how about adding model_group_run as argument, then user do not have to call add_model_to_model_group

# Creating a model with property classes
model_urn = client.create_model(
model_id="arima_model",
properties=models.MLModelPropertiesClass(
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

IMO, this also expose internal details of properties class to user, but since this properties class is complicated, hiding it might have pros/cons. might be helpful to add one more helper function for metrics/param? (not strong opinion)

@datahub-cyborg datahub-cyborg bot added pending-submitter-response Issue/request has been reviewed but requires a response from the submitter and removed needs-review Label for PRs that need review from a maintainer. labels Jan 27, 2025
@datahub-cyborg datahub-cyborg bot added needs-review Label for PRs that need review from a maintainer. and removed pending-submitter-response Issue/request has been reviewed but requires a response from the submitter labels Jan 28, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
ingestion PR or Issue related to the ingestion of metadata needs-review Label for PRs that need review from a maintainer. product PR or Issue related to the DataHub UI/UX smoke_test Contains changes related to smoke tests
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants