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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

[Ray client] return None from internal KV for non-existent keys #24058

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Apr 21, 2022
Merged

[Ray client] return None from internal KV for non-existent keys #24058

merged 1 commit into from
Apr 21, 2022

Conversation

mwtian
Copy link
Member

@mwtian mwtian commented Apr 20, 2022

Why are these changes needed?

This fixes the behavior diff between client and non-client internal KV.

Related issue number

Closes #21734

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 :(

@mwtian mwtian mentioned this pull request Apr 20, 2022
Closed
2 tasks
@mwtian mwtian changed the title [Ray client] return None from internal KV for non-existent key [Ray client] return None from internal KV for non-existent keys Apr 21, 2022
@mwtian mwtian marked this pull request as ready for review April 21, 2022 02:17
jovany-wang
jovany-wang approved these changes Apr 21, 2022
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@jovany-wang jovany-wang left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This fix works to me.

@mwtian
Copy link
Member Author

mwtian commented Apr 21, 2022

Need a code owner to review, thanks! @ijrsvt @ckw017

ijrsvt
ijrsvt approved these changes Apr 21, 2022
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@ijrsvt ijrsvt left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM, I guess we have the flag enabled to allow proto3 Optional fields.

@mwtian
Copy link
Member Author

mwtian commented Apr 21, 2022 •
edited
Loading

@ijrsvt proto3 optional field is default enabled since 3.15 (and Ray uses 3.16)! https://github.com/protocolbuffers/protobuf/blob/main/docs/field_presence.md#protoc-invocation

@fishbone fishbone merged commit 02b0d82 into ray-project:master Apr 21, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@fishbone fishbone fishbone approved these changes

@ijrsvt ijrsvt ijrsvt approved these changes

@jovany-wang jovany-wang jovany-wang approved these changes

@ckw017 ckw017 ckw017 approved these changes

@AmeerHajAli AmeerHajAli Awaiting requested review from AmeerHajAli

Assignees

@ckw017 ckw017

@ijrsvt ijrsvt

@fishbone fishbone

Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[Bug][RLlib] Gym environment registration does not work when using Ray Client and ray.init
5 participants
@mwtian @ckw017 @jovany-wang @ijrsvt @fishbone