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

Fix Master Label for PyTorchJob #1974

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 5, 2024

Conversation

andreyvelich
Copy link
Member

We shouldn't convert replica type to lower in IsMasterRole function for PyTorchJob since the replica type that we send is equal to Worker or Master as rtype: https://github.com/kubeflow/training-operator/blob/master/pkg/controller.v1/common/pod.go#L319

We are doing the same for TFJob: https://github.com/kubeflow/training-operator/blob/master/pkg/controller.v1/tensorflow/tfjob_controller.go#L609.

/assign @johnugeorge @deepanker13 @tenzen-y

Copy link

@andreyvelich: GitHub didn't allow me to assign the following users: deepanker13.

Note that only kubeflow members with read permissions, repo collaborators and people who have commented on this issue/PR can be assigned. Additionally, issues/PRs can only have 10 assignees at the same time.
For more information please see the contributor guide

In response to this:

We shouldn't convert replica type to lower in IsMasterRole function for PyTorchJob since the replica type that we send is equal to Worker or Master as rtype: https://github.com/kubeflow/training-operator/blob/master/pkg/controller.v1/common/pod.go#L319

We are doing the same for TFJob: https://github.com/kubeflow/training-operator/blob/master/pkg/controller.v1/tensorflow/tfjob_controller.go#L609.

/assign @johnugeorge @deepanker13 @tenzen-y

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.

@coveralls
Copy link

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 7414403602

  • 0 of 0 changed or added relevant lines in 0 files are covered.
  • No unchanged relevant lines lost coverage.
  • Overall coverage decreased (-0.1%) to 42.782%

Totals Coverage Status
Change from base Build 7285460954: -0.1%
Covered Lines: 3746
Relevant Lines: 8756

💛 - Coveralls

Copy link
Member

@tenzen-y tenzen-y left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks!
/lgtm
/approve

@google-oss-prow google-oss-prow bot added the lgtm label Jan 5, 2024
Copy link

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: andreyvelich, tenzen-y

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:
  • OWNERS [andreyvelich,tenzen-y]

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

@google-oss-prow google-oss-prow bot merged commit 78be11c into kubeflow:master Jan 5, 2024
33 checks passed
@andreyvelich andreyvelich deleted the fix-is-master branch January 5, 2024 15:21
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.

None yet

4 participants