-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 120
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
TaskVine: Fix serverless functionality #3410
TaskVine: Fix serverless functionality #3410
Conversation
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.
list_rotate
was written that way to avoid incurring the cost of a free
and then another malloc
which are surprisingly expensive in the inner loop of the scheduler.
That said, if it is incorrect or could otherwise be simplified, feel free to propose an improvement.
* Improve taskgraph output with minitasks and task names. * Add name parameter to minitasks. * Add name parameter to declare_mini_task * Use mini-task name in node label. * Update taskgraph example
* Remove labels for large scale graphs. * Improve graph example * Fix conda package name
…g-lab#3349) * create poncho package from dict or string * restructure * fix * sort spec and cache * fix typo * add logging info * fix sort * add doc * fix typos * fix doc + add example
PR is updated to conform to PR #3409. The issue of result formatting (where the returned value is a string in json format) is fine as long as:
|
Thanks for disentangling this. While I am content to let the function results be json-encoded for now, I'm not thrilled with the idea that the user is responsible for decoding from json. It seems to me that taskvine should do it for the user. (And that frees us up to do some other encoding later.) What do you think? |
This PR is RTM. |
Changing a task's state to READY inadvertently pushes that task to the list of ready tasks, which is not what we want if that task is a library task. This fixes the issue #3402 and adds test code.
PR #3409 should also be coordinated with this PR for FunctionCall API.
The formatting of results from a FunctionCall is a bit weird, as it is in the json format (see
vine_example_function_call.py:49
), which implies that results are json-serializable. Maybe cloudpickle is the better alternative here.