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

[api] Initial API deprecations for Ray 1.0 #10325

Merged
merged 40 commits into from
Aug 28, 2020
Merged

Conversation

ericl
Copy link
Contributor

@ericl ericl commented Aug 25, 2020

Why are these changes needed?

Initial set of API changes for Ray 1.0, focusing on the core Ray APIs. Some of these parameter removals are breaking changes, but none of them should be particularly impactful.

Planning spreadsheet:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1F6VZ1R_fgDzpRZjXI5_6gaUwW2CQKi431dCDTR-Vm8s/edit#gid=0

doc/source/using-ray-with-gpus.rst Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
python/ray/tests/test_advanced_3.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@@ -161,6 +161,7 @@ async def test_shard_key(serve_instance, task_runner_mock_actor):
assert call.request_args[0] in runner_shard_keys[i]


# TODO(fix)
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@edoakes @simon-mo this tests uses ray.register_custom_serializer, what's the best way to fix it?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'll remove it ASAP. on it

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It's gone

Copy link
Contributor

@edoakes edoakes left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The catharsis is real! We should publish a summary of all of the breaking changes that are being made when we release 1.0.

@stephanie-wang
Copy link
Contributor

I just realized that num_redis_shards isn't currently supported. I think it starts multiple redis shards but I don't think any of them except the primary are being used. Should we just remove that flag for now?

@stephanie-wang stephanie-wang added the @author-action-required The PR author is responsible for the next step. Remove tag to send back to the reviewer. label Aug 26, 2020
@ericl
Copy link
Contributor Author

ericl commented Aug 28, 2020

Looks like just 1 tune test failed; merging to unblock followup prs.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
@author-action-required The PR author is responsible for the next step. Remove tag to send back to the reviewer.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

9 participants