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

[RF] change default LikelihoodJob task splitting mode #16507

Merged

Conversation

egpbos
Copy link
Contributor

@egpbos egpbos commented Sep 23, 2024

This Pull request:

Changes or fixes:

Set the default LikelihoodJob tasks to be component-wise splits rather than event-wise splits

Checklist:

  • tested changes locally
  • updated the docs (not necessary)

Copy link

github-actions bot commented Sep 23, 2024

Test Results

    12 files      12 suites   2d 22h 48m 23s ⏱️
 2 697 tests  2 697 ✅ 0 💤 0 ❌
30 366 runs  30 366 ✅ 0 💤 0 ❌

Results for commit d581c61.

♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results.

@egpbos egpbos marked this pull request as draft September 23, 2024 14:27
@guitargeek guitargeek self-assigned this Sep 23, 2024
Set the default LikelihoodJob tasks to be component-wise splits rather than event-wise splits
@egpbos egpbos force-pushed the RF_LikelihoodJob_change_default_task branch from 4b6f1ca to d581c61 Compare September 23, 2024 20:06
@egpbos egpbos marked this pull request as ready for review September 23, 2024 20:08
@egpbos
Copy link
Contributor Author

egpbos commented Sep 26, 2024

@guitargeek the CI failures are unrelated to this PR. Ready for review :)

Copy link
Contributor

@guitargeek guitargeek 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! Thanks!

@egpbos egpbos merged commit c7ede40 into root-project:master Oct 2, 2024
17 of 19 checks passed
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.

2 participants