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

Tensorboard path generalisation #804

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Feb 10, 2020
Merged

Tensorboard path generalisation #804

merged 4 commits into from
Feb 10, 2020

Conversation

bobkemp
Copy link
Contributor

@bobkemp bobkemp commented Feb 8, 2020

Before submitting

  • [ y] Was this discussed/approved via a Github issue? (no need for typos, doc improvements)
  • [y ] Did you read the contributor guideline?
  • [ y] Did you make sure to update the docs?
  • [ y] Did you write any new necessary tests?

What does this PR do?

Fixes issue 793

You can (say) specify the version on the command line or generate it from the current datetime, which I find more meaningful than "version_73".

Likewise if the tensorboard data is not going to be preserved, it's much more readable in the tensorboard gui to skip the experiment name.

PR review

Anyone in the community is free to review the PR once the tests have passed.
If we didn't discuss your PR in Github issues there's a high chance it will not be merged.

Did you have fun?

Make sure you had fun coding 🙃

I learnt some things

Copy link
Member

@Borda Borda left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks nice, Thank you for youo help.
Could you pls adress some fomatting issues...

pytorch_lightning/loggers/tensorboard.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
pytorch_lightning/loggers/tensorboard.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
pytorch_lightning/loggers/tensorboard.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@Borda Borda added feature Is an improvement or enhancement good first issue Good for newcomers labels Feb 8, 2020
@Borda Borda added this to the 0.6.1 milestone Feb 8, 2020
Allow experiment names to be empty, in which case no per-experiment subdirectory will be created and checkpoints will be saved in the directory given by the save_dir parameter.
@bobkemp
Copy link
Contributor Author

bobkemp commented Feb 8, 2020

FYI, I slightly simplified my test. It still tests as much as the existing ones but doesn't check for the tensorboard output directory being created. Perhaps tensorboard doesn't create it immediately when saving in earlier versions. I couldn't get it to fail locally and it works for non-minimal versions.

version (int): Experiment version. If version is not specified the logger inspects the save
name (str): Experiment name. Defaults to "default". If it is the empty string then no per-experiment
subdirectory is used.
version (int|str): Experiment version. If version is not specified the logger inspects the save
directory for existing versions, then automatically assigns the next available version.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

this should have extra tab spacing as it belongs as a block to an argument

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Done

@property
def root_dir(self):
""" Parent directory for all tensorboard checkpoint subdirectories.
If the experiment name parameter is None or the empty string, no experiment subdirectory is used
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

there is no for extra tab spacing

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think it now follows the format used elsewhere. We're getting there.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

the point/issue is that still do not have unified formatting everywhere yet...

Copy link
Member

@Borda Borda left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@Borda Borda added the ready PRs ready to be merged label Feb 9, 2020
@williamFalcon williamFalcon merged commit 8fa802e into Lightning-AI:master Feb 10, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
feature Is an improvement or enhancement good first issue Good for newcomers ready PRs ready to be merged
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants