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

Do we need to support more than one training endpoint? #43

Open
georgeslabreche opened this issue Aug 16, 2022 · 1 comment
Open

Do we need to support more than one training endpoint? #43

georgeslabreche opened this issue Aug 16, 2022 · 1 comment
Labels
question Further information is requested

Comments

@georgeslabreche
Copy link
Collaborator

Is there a reason to support both types of training endpoint? Why not just pick one?

In MainVertical:

       // route for train type model, the given algorithm is pass by parameter
        router.post(Constants.LABEL_ENDPOINT_TRAINING)
                .handler(BodyHandler.create())
                .handler(this::trainingModel);

        // route for train model using given algorithm
        router.post(Constants.LABEL_ENDPOINT_TRAINING_ALGORITHM)
                .handler(BodyHandler.create())
                .handler(this::trainingModel);
@georgeslabreche georgeslabreche added the question Further information is requested label Aug 16, 2022
@cguz
Copy link
Contributor

cguz commented Aug 17, 2022

There is not any reason.

I only wanted to keep the initial idea.

But, feel free to keep only one. The trainingModel method considers the both endpoint.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
question Further information is requested
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants