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

[core] Simplify options handling [Part 2] #23882

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Apr 14, 2022

Conversation

suquark
Copy link
Member

@suquark suquark commented Apr 13, 2022

Why are these changes needed?

This is a follow up of #23127.

Related issue number

Checks

  • I've run scripts/format.sh to lint the changes in this PR.
  • I've included any doc changes needed for https://docs.ray.io/en/master/.
  • I've made sure the tests are passing. Note that there might be a few flaky tests, see the recent failures at https://flakey-tests.ray.io/
  • Testing Strategy
    • Unit tests
    • Release tests
    • This PR is not tested :(

# decorator. Last three conditions are to check that no resources were
# specified when _remote() was called.
if (
num_cpus is None
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The original implementation is kind of buggy: It does not consider the case of "memory". "memory" should also be considered as a resource.

@@ -2112,7 +2112,6 @@ def _mode(worker=global_worker):


def _make_remote(function_or_class, options):
# filter out placeholders in options
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

remove unexpected comment. I forgot to remove it last time.

@suquark suquark changed the title [WIP][core] Simplify options handling [Part 2] [core] Simplify options handling [Part 2] Apr 13, 2022
python/ray/serve/config.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
python/ray/serve/pipeline/generate.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@jjyao jjyao added the @author-action-required The PR author is responsible for the next step. Remove tag to send back to the reviewer. label Apr 13, 2022
@suquark
Copy link
Member Author

suquark commented Apr 13, 2022

I decide to leave Ray Serve for later PRs, since it more related to Ray Serve.

I just simply removed changes related to Ray Serve.

@suquark suquark requested a review from jjyao April 13, 2022 21:08
@suquark suquark removed the @author-action-required The PR author is responsible for the next step. Remove tag to send back to the reviewer. label Apr 13, 2022
@suquark
Copy link
Member Author

suquark commented Apr 14, 2022

All checks pass. I'll merge it.

@suquark suquark merged commit 9c81a97 into ray-project:master Apr 14, 2022
@suquark suquark deleted the cleanup_ray_options_2 branch April 14, 2022 05:09
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