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

Clean up metric columns #2964

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 3, 2020
Merged

Clean up metric columns #2964

merged 1 commit into from
Feb 3, 2020

Conversation

jingzhang36
Copy link
Contributor

@jingzhang36 jingzhang36 commented Feb 3, 2020

Internal bug thread b/135048320, reporting the metric columns of some runs are missing when displayed in RunList. This is not actually a bug but because the runs of the list are not required to have the same set of metrics and we currently show metric columns based on the first run in the list.

Reasoning:

  1. Given the fact that the main intention of displaying metric columns in a run list is for comparing these metrics across runs, we can conclude that the metric columns in run list make sense if the runs under comparison have the same set of metrics. On the other hand, in AllRun list, the runs are from all runs of unrelated pipelines in the system, and their metric sets have no inherent connection or comparison need. Therefore, in the AllRun list, we disable metric columns display.

  2. Meanwhile, e.g., if our users want to compare metric columns of runs from a same pipeline and hence having same metric columns, it is still available. They can leverage our "Experiment" feature. I.e., if they group runs of same metrics to a single experiment, our run list of a same experiment has the metric columns displayed.


This change is Reviewable

@jingzhang36
Copy link
Contributor Author

/assign @Bobgy

@Bobgy
Copy link
Contributor

Bobgy commented Feb 3, 2020

Thanks! That sounds reasonable to me.
/lgtm
/approve

Do you need to ask anyone else's opinion? If not, please unhold

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: Bobgy

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 /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@jingzhang36
Copy link
Contributor Author

jingzhang36 commented Feb 3, 2020

@Bobgy Thanks for the review and update: In b/135048320, Katie lgtm'ed. So
/unhold

@jingzhang36 jingzhang36 merged commit 99d1568 into kubeflow:master Feb 3, 2020
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@jingzhang36: The following test failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests:

Test name Commit Details Rerun command
kubeflow-pipeline-e2e-test 7073dd9 link /test kubeflow-pipeline-e2e-test

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR.

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.

Jeffwan pushed a commit to Jeffwan/pipelines that referenced this pull request Dec 9, 2020
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