-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 443
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
Prune of unused artifacts links via client #2192
Prune of unused artifacts links via client #2192
Conversation
Important Auto Review SkippedAuto reviews are disabled on this repository. Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the To trigger a single review, invoke the WalkthroughThe ZenML library has introduced a new feature for artifact management. A method called Changes
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (invoked as PR comments)
Additionally, you can add CodeRabbit Configration File (
|
@coderabbitai review |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Review Status
Actionable comments generated: 2
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Files selected for processing (2)
- src/zenml/client.py (1 hunks)
- tests/integration/functional/test_client.py (2 hunks)
Additional comments: 1
tests/integration/functional/test_client.py (1)
- 30-30: Verify that the newly imported
ExternalArtifact
is used appropriately in the tests and that there are no unused imports.
…s-links-via-client
Co-authored-by: Alex Strick van Linschoten <strickvl@users.noreply.github.com>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM, but two tiny nits to make it a bit more readable
Co-authored-by: Alex Strick van Linschoten <strickvl@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Alex Strick van Linschoten <strickvl@users.noreply.github.com>
…s-links-via-client
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Just my usual performance related suggestions, but good to merge otherwise.
src/zenml/client.py
Outdated
for unused_artifact_version in unused_artifact_versions: | ||
try: | ||
self.delete_artifact_version( | ||
name_id_or_prefix=unused_artifact_version.id, | ||
delete_metadata=not only_artifact, | ||
delete_from_artifact_store=not only_metadata, | ||
) | ||
unused_artifact = unused_artifact_version.artifact | ||
if not unused_artifact.versions and not only_artifact: | ||
self.delete_artifact(unused_artifact.id) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Similar to the PR where you implemented the "delete all model version artifacts", there is a performance hit with this type of loop that ends up calling the REST API multiple times. You should consider implementing this as a REST API endpoint and looping in the SQL zen store instead (perhaps even deleting entities en-masse through a single SQL query, if possible). This opens the possibility of using this functionality through the dashboard.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hey, I'm half way through implementing this change, but stuck at the verify_permissions_and_delete_entity
. It was rather clear what to check on single entry deletion, but here I prune Artifact, Artifact Version and Data at scale. Any thoughts? Shall I check for Admin permissions to do so?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I only have a half-baked idea about how to get around this: maybe we need a new prune
permission that you check globally at server level, as opposed to checking against every resource. But that requires more work, not only here, but probably also at Cloud API level.
@schustmi what do you think ?
…s-links-via-client
…s-links-via-client
…s-links-via-client
…s-links-via-client
Describe changes
I implemented pruning of unused artifacts and their versions via Client to bring it in sync with CLI.
Pre-requisites
Please ensure you have done the following:
develop
and the open PR is targetingdevelop
. If your branch wasn't based on develop read Contribution guide on rebasing branch to develop.Types of changes
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Tests