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

bump version number #137

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Sep 26, 2023
Merged

bump version number #137

merged 2 commits into from
Sep 26, 2023

Conversation

vladmandic
Copy link
Contributor

@vladmandic vladmandic commented Aug 29, 2023

bumps version number of torchsde package so it can be used to create a new release and published to pypi.
see #131 for details

@patrick-kidger
Copy link
Collaborator

The failing tests here are what I was referring to over in #131 btw; I think the CI needs updating.

@vladmandic
Copy link
Contributor Author

The failing tests here are what I was referring to over in #131 btw; I think the CI needs updating.

yup. but updating CI is non-trivial since it has a lot of obsolete dependencies (not to mention python 3.6 itself).
and you said yourself this is no longer an actively maintained package.

so we can either:

  • disable CI and do a release and package push
  • agree this will never get done - and cause quite a stir once pip upgrades this from warning to actual error (as it promises to do) since there are many upstream packages relying on this.

@patrick-kidger
Copy link
Collaborator

patrick-kidger commented Aug 29, 2023

I think that's about right. I'm inclined toward the second option for now.

It has been very cool to see how much usage torchsde has received downstream! Hopefully this suggests that someone will be willing to step up to the plate and do the work to update the CI. If anyone else comes across this and wants to do the work, go for it! I'm very happy to merge fixes.

(
Absent that, the main other recommendation I have for you is to use Diffrax instead. This is maintained and actively developed. Why the second library? Diffrax uses the lessons we learnt building torchsde -- which was only ever a research project -- to produce something suitable for use in production. So Diffrax is faster, generally more featureful, etc.
)

@JulianVolodia
Copy link

Absent that, the main other recommendation I have for you is to use Diffrax instead.

any easy way to refactor from torchsde to diffrax? Have you seen models like SD1.5/SD XL 1.0 using diffrax in any context? So I could see it and try to refactor in Automatic1111 sd webui?

@patrick-kidger
Copy link
Collaborator

patrick-kidger commented Sep 6, 2023

Great questions!

  1. Is it easy to refactor?

I find refactoring to be straightforward. As someone who already knows both frameworks: for a "serious" model like a u-net, transformer, diffusion, whatever, it usually takes me about a day. Everyone's settled on the same basic set of primitives: linear layers, conv layers, and so on.

  1. Are there existing implementations of SD?

I don't know of specifically a public SD implementation. It wouldn't be terribly hard, though, and we could definitely publicise that as an example if someone takes the time to implement it.

As a reference point though, there is a concise (hopefully pedagogical) diffusion implementation here.

@vladmandic
Copy link
Contributor Author

vladmandic commented Sep 6, 2023

Absent that, the main other recommendation I have for you is to use Diffrax instead.

any easy way to refactor from torchsde to diffrax? Have you seen models like SD1.5/SD XL 1.0 using diffrax in any context? So I could see it and try to refactor in Automatic1111 sd webui?

torchsde is used upstream in k-diffusers and as well as in diffusers - and pretty much ALL sd implementations are using first (if you're using original ldm pipeline) or the second (if you're using diffusers pipeline) for samplers implementations.

as such, pretty much NO application can refactor to switch away from torchsde. and when i say that, i mean 99% of sd install base as i'm sure there is somewhere something that uses diffrax

basically only realistic choice is if someone forks this repo and takes on maintaining it.

@lxuechen
Copy link
Collaborator

lxuechen commented Sep 7, 2023

Given the discussions here, I'll try my best to find a few hours this weekend to patch the issues here, if they have not been fixed by then.

@akx akx mentioned this pull request Sep 26, 2023
@akx
Copy link
Contributor

akx commented Sep 26, 2023

@vladmandic #140 was merged, so please rebase? :)

@vladmandic
Copy link
Contributor Author

@vladmandic #140 was merged, so please rebase? :)

done!

@patrick-kidger patrick-kidger self-requested a review September 26, 2023 21:48
@patrick-kidger patrick-kidger merged commit 5a63002 into google-research:master Sep 26, 2023
5 checks passed
@vladmandic
Copy link
Contributor Author

great stuff - now only for pypi push/refresh :)

@patrick-kidger
Copy link
Collaborator

Hurrah! I've just merged and done a push to PyPI. Lmk how things go.

@lxuechen
Copy link
Collaborator

Thanks! @akx @vladmandic @patrick-kidger

@vladmandic
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hurrah! I've just merged and done a push to PyPI. Lmk how things go.

looks all good here!

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.

5 participants