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 anyscale-endpoints finetune #8713

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Jan 30, 2024
Merged

Fix anyscale-endpoints finetune #8713

merged 1 commit into from Jan 30, 2024

Conversation

StpMax
Copy link
Collaborator

@StpMax StpMax commented Jan 30, 2024

Description

Please include a summary of the change and the issue it solves.

Fixes #issue_number

Type of change

(Please delete options that are not relevant)

  • πŸ› Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • ⚑ New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • πŸ“’ Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality not to work as expected)
  • πŸ“„ This change requires a documentation update

Verification Process

To ensure the changes are working as expected:

  • Test Location: Specify the URL or path for testing.
  • Verification Steps: Outline the steps or queries needed to validate the change. Include any data, configurations, or actions required to reproduce or see the new functionality.

Additional Media:

  • I have attached a brief loom video or screenshots showcasing the new functionality or change.

Checklist:

  • My code follows the style guidelines(PEP 8) of MindsDB.
  • I have appropriately commented on my code, especially in complex areas.
  • Necessary documentation updates are either made or tracked in issues.
  • Relevant unit and integration tests are updated or added.

@StpMax StpMax merged commit 2ad660b into staging Jan 30, 2024
11 checks passed
super().finetune(df, args)
using_args = args.get('using', {})
self._set_models(using_args)
super().finetune(df, using_args)
Copy link
Member

@paxcema paxcema Feb 2, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Curious as to why this was done? It introduced a bug where target may not be present. Shouldn't we still send args proper to finetune() instead?

EDIT: presumably there was another bug that this fixed, but we need to get a solution where both work fine. Would love to get more details.

@StpMax StpMax mentioned this pull request Feb 19, 2024
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.

None yet

3 participants