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

Ui migration #298

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Sep 18, 2018
Merged

Ui migration #298

merged 2 commits into from
Sep 18, 2018

Conversation

Masuzu
Copy link
Contributor

@Masuzu Masuzu commented Aug 21, 2018

Move the UI from the Cuttle core module to the Cuttle timeseries module

Masuzu added 2 commits August 20, 2018 20:09
`Workload` one without any notion of dependencies.

Rebase of criteo#277

----

The idea is that the current `Workflow` is very tied to
the timeseries scheduler. It can be a useless concept for
simpler scheduler without any need to express dependencies.
At the same time it is not powerful enough for more sophisticated
scheduler that could manage more dynamic workflow.

The current `Worklow` type is moved to the timeseries package. In the
core model we introduce a new `Workload` type that is basically a
set of `Jobs' to execution.

We also introduce a `HelloCustomScheduling` example demonstrating how
one can use Cuttle as a platform to execution jobs with an adhoc
schedulign mechanism.

----

On the UI side it is more complicated as a lot of timeseries screens
are hard-coded in the core module. This change ensure that the UI is
still compatible even if another scheduler is used, but some screens
are not available.

More work is needed in the future to allow custom scheduler to plug
their own UI.
@Masuzu Masuzu requested review from dufrannea and bubblesly August 21, 2018 14:23
Copy link
Contributor

@guillaumebort guillaumebort left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good to me.

@Masuzu Masuzu merged commit 7e04a8f into criteo:master Sep 18, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants