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

Documentation and code updates clarifying the behavior of the in_memory flag #8851

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Oct 2, 2024

Conversation

emolter
Copy link
Collaborator

@emolter emolter commented Oct 2, 2024

#8782 added a pipeline-level in_memory flag to calwebb_image3 that governs the on_disk status of the ModelLibrary that is passed through all the pipeline steps. The same PR updated the outlier detection step to figure out whether the compute the median in-memory or using memory-saving options based on the on_disk status of the input ModelLibrary. This is generally a good thing, because it means that the pipeline-level in_memory flag actually does enforce doing all computations in memory. However, it also means that the step-specific in_memory flag for the OutlierDetectionStep is ignored when running the entire pipeline.

This PR updates the documentation to clarify the interaction between the pipeline-level and step-level in_memory flags for outlier detection.

This PR also removes unnecessary passing of the in_memory flag into ResampleData because that flag doesn't actually do anything in this context and passing it explicitly is therefore confusing.

No JIRA ticket or issue. Discovered during conversation with @tapastro

Tasks

  • request a review from someone specific, to avoid making the maintainers review every PR
  • add a build milestone, i.e. Build 11.3 (use the latest build if not sure)
  • Does this PR change user-facing code / API? (if not, label with no-changelog-entry-needed)
    • write news fragment(s) in changes/: echo "changed something" > changes/<PR#>.<changetype>.rst (see below for change types)
    • update or add relevant tests
    • update relevant docstrings and / or docs/ page
    • start a regression test and include a link to the running job (click here for instructions)
      • Do truth files need to be updated ("okified")?
        • after the reviewer has approved these changes, run okify_regtests to update the truth files
  • if a JIRA ticket exists, make sure it is resolved properly
news fragment change types...
  • changes/<PR#>.general.rst: infrastructure or miscellaneous change
  • changes/<PR#>.docs.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.stpipe.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.datamodels.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.scripts.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.fits_generator.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.set_telescope_pointing.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.pipeline.rst

stage 1

  • changes/<PR#>.group_scale.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.dq_init.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.emicorr.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.saturation.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.ipc.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.firstframe.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.lastframe.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.reset.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.superbias.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.refpix.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.linearity.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.rscd.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.persistence.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.dark_current.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.charge_migration.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.jump.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.clean_flicker_noise.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.ramp_fitting.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.gain_scale.rst

stage 2

  • changes/<PR#>.assign_wcs.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.badpix_selfcal.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.msaflagopen.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.nsclean.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.imprint.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.background.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.extract_2d.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.master_background.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.wavecorr.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.srctype.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.straylight.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.wfss_contam.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.flatfield.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.fringe.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.pathloss.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.barshadow.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.photom.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.pixel_replace.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.resample_spec.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.residual_fringe.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.cube_build.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.extract_1d.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.resample.rst

stage 3

  • changes/<PR#>.assign_mtwcs.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.mrs_imatch.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.tweakreg.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.skymatch.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.exp_to_source.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.outlier_detection.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.tso_photometry.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.stack_refs.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.align_refs.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.klip.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.spectral_leak.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.source_catalog.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.combine_1d.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.ami.rst

other

  • changes/<PR#>.wfs_combine.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.white_light.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.cube_skymatch.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.engdb_tools.rst
  • changes/<PR#>.guider_cds.rst

@emolter emolter marked this pull request as ready for review October 2, 2024 14:34
@emolter emolter requested a review from a team as a code owner October 2, 2024 14:34
@emolter emolter requested review from braingram and tapastro and removed request for a team October 2, 2024 14:34
Copy link

codecov bot commented Oct 2, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 61.79%. Comparing base (fb3c2cd) to head (4e740ca).
Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #8851   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   61.79%   61.79%           
=======================================
  Files         377      377           
  Lines       38834    38834           
=======================================
  Hits        23999    23999           
  Misses      14835    14835           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

Copy link
Collaborator

@braingram braingram left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks! LGTM.

Copy link
Contributor

@tapastro tapastro left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

One small request, not necessary: add a comment to the spec block in outlier_detection_step for the in_memory entry reiterating "ignored if run as part of pipeline". LGTM either way 👍

@emolter emolter enabled auto-merge (squash) October 2, 2024 20:29
@emolter emolter merged commit b47cac8 into spacetelescope:main Oct 2, 2024
30 checks passed
@emolter emolter deleted the outlier-memory-fixes branch October 2, 2024 21:08
hayescr pushed a commit to hayescr/jwst that referenced this pull request Oct 29, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants