-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.6k
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
feat(sdk+backend): Add support for generic ephemeral volume #10605
feat(sdk+backend): Add support for generic ephemeral volume #10605
Conversation
Hi @abaland. Thanks for your PR. I'm waiting for a kubeflow member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the 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. |
@@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ | |||
from kfp import kubernetes | |||
|
|||
|
|||
class TestUseSecretAsVolume: | |||
class TestNodeSelector: |
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.
completely unrelated, just saw this when debugging unit tests
db85cbe
to
4f15bc1
Compare
/ok-to-test |
4f15bc1
to
fd9f727
Compare
/retest |
6273707
to
a7efe78
Compare
/retest |
Is there a way to get access to the Artifacts produced by the above tests? |
Mhhh, one of the errors (samples-v2) is
One (backend-test) is
which i could reproduce locally by just executing the test folder and got
I don't think this MR touched anything related to the above, which makes me think this is related to the multiple MR from last night's and the KFP api server release that came with it. |
For the first error, I see that it used to be
V2beta1GetHealthzResponse in https://github.com/kubeflow/pipelines/blob/5399585b6a0f92446bcfc5a7588f2a85ea0fe6a3/backend/api/v2beta1/python_http_client/kfp_server_api/__init__.py#L55C1-L56C1so i guess i could switch other all kfp_server_api.Api* to kfp_server_api.V2beta1* , but I'll admit i have no idea why this is happening and where/how this changed. So any pointer is more than welcome
|
@rimolive I rebased the current branch onto master after the previous PR had been merged (and also pulled the most recent version of go kubernetes_platform module) but unfortunately that did not fix the tests. |
/retest |
@abaland Can you rebase to the latest commit to include the new API client code? Thanks |
…d support to backend Signed-off-by: abaland <abaland@indeed.com>
…d support to backend Signed-off-by: abaland <abaland@indeed.com>
a7efe78
to
de44ab2
Compare
Just did 🤞 |
Signed-off-by: abaland <abaland@indeed.com>
Signed-off-by: abaland <abaland@indeed.com>
@abaland: The following tests 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 kubernetes/test-infra repository. I understand the commands that are listed here. |
Ok the required tests passed this time :dance: The samples tests failing: I tried compiling one of the kfp-kubernetes-execution-tests test case locally, uploading it to our KFP environment (running on KF 1.8 release) and running it but it did not cause any error, so i'm not sure what's going on. the samples-v2 is having the same issues as before and using the wrong api endpoint in kfp_server_api, which seems unrelated to the current PR |
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.
/lgtm
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: chensun, Tomcli 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 |
Description of your changes:
This change is the second half of the intended change in #10602 but adds the actual support for ephemeral volume in SDK and KFP backend.
I haven't actually tested this locally yet (I think I'll need to update the go.mod once the other PR is approved/merged/deployed), but I think the code will mostly stay the same as long as no bugs occurs when i try this out in our KFP fork
Checklist: