-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 835
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
Add requestPath metadata on Python Wrapper #2587
Add requestPath metadata on Python Wrapper #2587
Conversation
Just needs to add tests and we should be good |
Tue Oct 27 17:53:34 UTC 2020 impatient try |
Tue Oct 27 17:53:35 UTC 2020 impatient try |
/test integration |
Tue Oct 27 17:57:57 UTC 2020 impatient try |
Just checked that this works nice for both REST and gRPC. Gonna add unit tests and we are good to merge 👍 |
@axsaucedo added unit tests - I think it's ready to merge |
Mon Nov 2 12:14:43 UTC 2020 impatient try |
Mon Nov 2 12:15:02 UTC 2020 impatient try |
Mon Nov 2 12:15:03 UTC 2020 impatient try |
/retest |
Mon Nov 2 15:31:37 UTC 2020 impatient try |
@RafalSkolasinski: The following test failed, say
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the jenkins-x/lighthouse repository. I understand the commands that are listed here. |
I see failure in |
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.
Looks good, added a couple of comments, would be good to hear thoughts, but depending on whehter we do it in a separate pr it could be good to go
@@ -24,6 +24,22 @@ | |||
from tensorflow.core.framework.tensor_pb2 import TensorProto | |||
|
|||
|
|||
ENV_MODEL_NAME = "PREDICTIVE_UNIT_ID" |
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.
Is this not something that you could re-use from the metrics file? I believe you also define this there.
NONIMPLEMENTED_MSG = "NOT_IMPLEMENTED" | ||
|
||
model_name = os.environ.get(ENV_MODEL_NAME, f"{NONIMPLEMENTED_MSG}") | ||
image_name = os.environ.get( |
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.
Same for this, ideally we use the metrics class component for this (or move the logic from metrics to util, but this would require changing the alibi detect server as it now also uses this logic as well)
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.
Probably better then do it in separate PR as refactoring. The only reason I didn't re-use code from metrics
is that this indeed would fit some utils
location a bit more.
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.
And it would be kind of weird to use metrics.model_name
for non-metrics related things.
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.
Ok, if you open an issue we should be able to merge 👍
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.
/approve |
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: axsaucedo The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
What this PR does / why we need it:
Adds
meta.requestPath
information on Python Wrapper to ensure backwards compatibility with EngineWhich issue(s) this PR fixes:
Closes #2505
Special notes for your reviewer:
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?: