Closed vanpelt closed 3 years ago
vanpelt
commented
3 years ago Thanks for the feedback @annirudh one other thing I realized is this makes it really easy to declare an artifact as being an input and output of a single run. It's probably not a big deal but wanted to flag it.
coveralls
commented
3 years ago | Changes Missing Coverage | Covered Lines | Changed/Added Lines | % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| wandb/apis/public.py | 22 | 23 | 95.65% | ||
| wandb/internal/sender.py | 0 | 1 | 0.0% | ||
| <!-- | Total: | 48 | 50 | 96.0% | --> |
| Files with Coverage Reduction | New Missed Lines | % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| wandb/internal/sender.py | 1 | 73.26% | ||
| <!-- | Total: | 1 | --> |
| Totals | |
|---|---|
| Change from base Build e8e76b13-d802-4c56-b120-12ec1c13b1bd: | 0.2% |
| Covered Lines: | 12730 |
| Relevant Lines: | 21050 |
annirudh
commented
3 years ago Thanks for the feedback @annirudh one other thing I realized is this makes it really easy to declare an artifact as being an input and output of a single run. It's probably not a big deal but wanted to flag it.
Maybe we should reject those types of circular references. I think that could really mess up a lot of assumptions elsewhere.
vanpelt
commented
3 years ago Maybe we should reject those types of circular references. I think that could really mess up a lot of assumptions elsewhere.
Yeah, I was wondering how our graph view would render it, but it seems to not blow up the frontend.
This adds use_artifact and log_artifact to the public api. It only supports linking existing artifacts.