Make run & experiment deletion / restoration idempotent #6641
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
21 tasks
github-actions
bot
added
area/tracking
Signed-off-by: dbczumar <corey.zumar@databricks.com>
BenWilson2
reviewed
Aug 30, 2022
| @@ -542,10 +542,13 @@ def test_delete_restore_run(self): | |||
| _, run_dir = fs._find_run_root(run_id) | |||
| # Should not throw. | |||
| assert fs.get_run(run_id).info.lifecycle_stage == "active" | |||
| # Verify that run deletion is idempotent by deleting twice | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Did you want to issue 2 delete commands here?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Great catch! Forgot to remove check_run_is_active() from FileStore.delete_run().
Signed-off-by: dbczumar <corey.zumar@databricks.com>
Signed-off-by: dbczumar <corey.zumar@databricks.com>
prithvikannan
pushed a commit
to prithvikannan/mlflow
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 6, 2022
* Dont check active Signed-off-by: dbczumar <corey.zumar@databricks.com> * Fixes Signed-off-by: dbczumar <corey.zumar@databricks.com> * Format Signed-off-by: dbczumar <corey.zumar@databricks.com> * Remove unused methods Signed-off-by: dbczumar <corey.zumar@databricks.com> * Actually delete twice Signed-off-by: dbczumar <corey.zumar@databricks.com> * Remove missing active check Signed-off-by: dbczumar <corey.zumar@databricks.com> Signed-off-by: dbczumar <corey.zumar@databricks.com> Signed-off-by: Prithvi Kannan <prithvi.kannan@databricks.com>
prithvikannan
pushed a commit
to prithvikannan/mlflow
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 7, 2022
* Dont check active Signed-off-by: dbczumar <corey.zumar@databricks.com> * Fixes Signed-off-by: dbczumar <corey.zumar@databricks.com> * Format Signed-off-by: dbczumar <corey.zumar@databricks.com> * Remove unused methods Signed-off-by: dbczumar <corey.zumar@databricks.com> * Actually delete twice Signed-off-by: dbczumar <corey.zumar@databricks.com> * Remove missing active check Signed-off-by: dbczumar <corey.zumar@databricks.com> Signed-off-by: dbczumar <corey.zumar@databricks.com> Signed-off-by: Prithvi Kannan <prithvi.kannan@databricks.com>
nnethery
pushed a commit
to nnethery/mlflow
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 1, 2024
* Dont check active Signed-off-by: dbczumar <corey.zumar@databricks.com> * Fixes Signed-off-by: dbczumar <corey.zumar@databricks.com> * Format Signed-off-by: dbczumar <corey.zumar@databricks.com> * Remove unused methods Signed-off-by: dbczumar <corey.zumar@databricks.com> * Actually delete twice Signed-off-by: dbczumar <corey.zumar@databricks.com> * Remove missing active check Signed-off-by: dbczumar <corey.zumar@databricks.com> Signed-off-by: dbczumar <corey.zumar@databricks.com>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Fixes #6606
What changes are proposed in this pull request?
Make run & experiment deletion / restoration idempotent
How is this patch tested?
Added unit tests
Does this PR change the documentation?
Detailslink on thePreview docscheck.Release Notes
Make run & experiment deletion / restoration idempotent
Is this a user-facing change?
What component(s), interfaces, languages, and integrations does this PR affect?
Components
area/artifacts: Artifact stores and artifact loggingarea/build: Build and test infrastructure for MLflowarea/docs: MLflow documentation pagesarea/examples: Example codearea/model-registry: Model Registry service, APIs, and the fluent client calls for Model Registryarea/models: MLmodel format, model serialization/deserialization, flavorsarea/pipelines: Pipelines, Pipeline APIs, Pipeline configs, Pipeline Templatesarea/projects: MLproject format, project running backendsarea/scoring: MLflow Model server, model deployment tools, Spark UDFsarea/server-infra: MLflow Tracking server backendarea/tracking: Tracking Service, tracking client APIs, autologgingInterface
area/uiux: Front-end, user experience, plotting, JavaScript, JavaScript dev serverarea/docker: Docker use across MLflow's components, such as MLflow Projects and MLflow Modelsarea/sqlalchemy: Use of SQLAlchemy in the Tracking Service or Model Registryarea/windows: Windows supportLanguage
language/r: R APIs and clientslanguage/java: Java APIs and clientslanguage/new: Proposals for new client languagesIntegrations
integrations/azure: Azure and Azure ML integrationsintegrations/sagemaker: SageMaker integrationsintegrations/databricks: Databricks integrationsHow should the PR be classified in the release notes? Choose one:
rn/breaking-change- The PR will be mentioned in the "Breaking Changes" sectionrn/none- No description will be included. The PR will be mentioned only by the PR number in the "Small Bugfixes and Documentation Updates" sectionrn/feature- A new user-facing feature worth mentioning in the release notesrn/bug-fix- A user-facing bug fix worth mentioning in the release notesrn/documentation- A user-facing documentation change worth mentioning in the release notes