ODFV UDFs should handle list types

[Agent007]

ODFV UDFs handling list types (e.g., embeddings/vectors) should be registered without error.

Signed-off-by: Jeff [email protected]

What this PR does / why we need it:

Fixes a bug in which ODFV UDFs handling list types (e.g., embeddings/vectors) weren't able to be registered.

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Fixes #1995

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?:

Supports list types in on demand feature view udfs.

[feast-ci-bot]

Hi @Agent007. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a feast-dev member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

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 kubernetes/test-infra repository.

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Merging #2002 (c655d1b) into master (63680ba) will decrease coverage by 0.02%.
The diff coverage is 78.72%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #2002      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   83.23%   83.20%   -0.03%     
==========================================
  Files         103      103              
  Lines        8421     8467      +46     
==========================================
+ Hits         7009     7045      +36     
- Misses       1412     1422      +10     

Flag	Coverage Δ
integrationtests	74.44% <78.72%> (+0.04%)	⬆️
unittests	60.16% <27.65%> (-0.19%)	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
...tegration/feature_repos/universal/feature_views.py	83.33% <60.86%> (-13.97%)	⬇️
sdk/python/feast/type_map.py	72.66% <75.00%> (+0.06%)	⬆️
...ts/integration/feature_repos/universal/entities.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...istration/test_universal_odfv_feature_inference.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 63680ba...c655d1b. Read the comment docs.

[adchia]

/ok-to-test

[adchia]

/lgtm

[feast-ci-bot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: adchia, Agent007

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:

• OWNERS [adchia]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

[Agent007]

@adchia In addition to the aforementioned RedShift-related errors, I now see errors related to tracing_span() after rebasing the latest from the main branch. I thought FEAST_USAGE is False in the integration test environment, so I don't see how tracing_span() would raise its RuntimeError if _is_enabled is supposed to be False.
Also, FYI, in order for make test-python-universal-local pass, I added checks in test_feature_get_online_features_types_match() to see if feature is not None before making the assertions on the expected feature types. Did you intend to handle None features differently?

[judahrand]

@adchia , I think your integration test environment's RedShift instance may need to be updated to recognize the SUPER data type. The RedShift-based integration tests are failing because the example test data containing array types aren't able to be saved in RedShift...

Might it be simpler to change the tests used for verifying this PR to avoid this and open a separate PR to add a test for SUPER columns? Just conscious that this ODFV list feature applies to ALL offline + online stores so not sure it makes sense to block on Redshift.

Might get both merged faster too.

[adchia]

yep agreed with @judahrand . The main thing preventing the merge is now #2007 going in. We also had a fix for the tracing span bug that already win.

[Agent007]

@judahrand Apologies for the delay. I'm juggling other tasks at work currently. Please feel free to add onto this PR branch if this is urgent for you.

[adchia]

/lgtm