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

Add documentation for LFS caching, The Bridge and Save Atomic Files Workflow #2288

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Sep 8, 2023

Conversation

atharva-2001
Copy link
Member

📝 Description

🚦 testing | 📝 documentation | 🎢 infrastructure

📌 Resources

Examples, notebooks, and links to useful references.

🚦 Testing

How did you test these changes?

  • Testing pipeline
  • Other method (describe)
  • My changes can't be tested (explain why)

☑️ Checklist

  • I requested two reviewers for this pull request
  • I updated the documentation according to my changes
  • I built the documentation by applying the build_docs label

Note: If you are not allowed to perform any of these actions, ping (@) a contributor.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented May 4, 2023

Codecov Report

Merging #2288 (43befcd) into master (b8f0af5) will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

❗ Current head 43befcd differs from pull request most recent head 26797d7. Consider uploading reports for the commit 26797d7 to get more accurate results

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master    #2288   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   68.49%   68.49%           
=======================================
  Files         145      145           
  Lines       13245    13245           
=======================================
  Hits         9072     9072           
  Misses       4173     4173           

📣 We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD build times. Learn more

@tardis-bot
Copy link
Contributor

tardis-bot commented May 4, 2023

*beep* *bop*

Hi, human.

The docs workflow has succeeded ✔️

Click here to see your results.

@atharva-2001 atharva-2001 marked this pull request as ready for review May 24, 2023 13:31
@atharva-2001 atharva-2001 changed the title Add documentation for LFS caching Add documentation for LFS caching, The Bridge and Save Atomic Files Workflow May 24, 2023
`this notebook <https://github.com/tardis-sn/tardis-refdata/blob/master/notebooks/ref_data_compare_from_paths.ipynb>`_.
The workflow has a ``workflow_dispatch`` event so that it can be triggered manually, but is also
triggered every week due to the "save-atomic-files" workflow.
The bridge fails currently there is a discrepancy between
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I don't think it's worth including this information since it requires us to keep it up to date.

Copy link
Member Author

@atharva-2001 atharva-2001 Jun 5, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Should we then have a general statement about the purpose of the workflow? Or should I remove the entire added documentation for the bridge and the save-atomic-files workflow?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

No, the part you should remove is that "the bridge fails currently..." the documentation should just include the intended behaviour. Issues should list problems with that intended behaviour.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I see!

@andrewfullard andrewfullard enabled auto-merge (squash) June 1, 2023 13:11
Copy link
Contributor

@andrewfullard andrewfullard left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Please remove the bit about the failing bridge

andrewfullard
andrewfullard previously approved these changes Jun 19, 2023
Copy link
Member

@sonachitchyan sonachitchyan left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Why does the benchmark workflow fail here?

@atharva-2001
Copy link
Member Author

atharva-2001 commented Jul 10, 2023

Why does the benchmark workflow fail here?

@sonachitchyan It's just to see how the workflow runs. The benchmarks workflow has nothing to do with this pull request. I just wanted to try the workflow somewhere so I ran it here.
As to why it fails- the comment isn't made because the workflow is a pull_request event. I would open a PR to fix it in sometime.

@andrewfullard
Copy link
Contributor

Rebase and we can just merge this.

@andrewfullard andrewfullard self-requested a review August 23, 2023 14:42
@tardis-bot
Copy link
Contributor

tardis-bot commented Aug 23, 2023

*beep* *bop*
Hi human,
I ran benchmarks as you asked comparing master (b8f0af5) and the latest commit (26797d7).
Here are the logs produced by ASV.
Results can also be downloaded as artifacts here.
Significantly changed benchmarks:

All benchmarks:

All benchmarks:

     before           after         ratio
   [b8f0af59]       [26797d77]
        731±4ms        715±0.2ms     0.98  benchmark_run_tardis.Benchmarkruntardis.time_run_tardis

andrewfullard
andrewfullard previously approved these changes Aug 23, 2023
@andrewfullard andrewfullard merged commit dffac0a into tardis-sn:master Sep 8, 2023
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.

4 participants