mxnet-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Marco de Abreu <marco.g.ab...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Stopping nightly releases to Pypi
Date Thu, 09 Jan 2020 14:31:36 GMT
Great, thanks a lot sheng!

-Marco

Sheng Zha <zhasheng@apache.org> schrieb am Do., 9. Jan. 2020, 14:28:

> I'm fixing the CD pipeline in
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/17259/files and will
> update the s3 publish path so that it's friendly for automatically
> generating such page.
>
> -sz
>
> On 2020/01/06 18:19:52, "Lausen, Leonard" <lausen@amazon.com.INVALID>
> wrote:
> > Consider a user finds a bug in a nightly version but we can't narrow
> down the
> > version of mxnet used as the name is constant over time. Or users wan't
> to
> > revert back to the previous nightly version installed but don't know
> which date
> > it was from due to constant name.
> >
> > Instead I suggest we introduce an autogenerated page like
> > https://download.pytorch.org/whl/nightly/cu101/torch_nightly.html
> >
> > Then "pip install -f URLTOPAGE mxnet" will install the latest available
> version.
> > Maybe the team maintaining the S3 bucket can reconsider creating such
> page for
> > the intermediate time until the CD based nighlty build is operating.
> >
> > On Mon, 2020-01-06 at 10:01 -0800, Lin Yuan wrote:
> > > +1 for a nightly pip with fixed name.
> > >
> > > We need this to track mxnet integration with other packages such as
> Horovod.
> > >
> > > Sam, when do you think we can have this nightly build with a fixed
> name?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Lin
> > >
> > > On Sun, Jan 5, 2020 at 7:48 PM Skalicky, Sam
> <sskalic@amazon.com.invalid>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Tao,
> > > >
> > > > We dont have this yet, but we did think about putting the latest
> wheels in
> > > > a specific place in the s3 bucket so they are always updated.
> Initially we
> > > > decided not to do this since the main MXNet CD should have been
> fixed. But
> > > > since its still not fixed yet, we might try and go ahead and do this.
> > > >
> > > > Sam
> > > >
> > > > On Jan 5, 2020, at 6:02 PM, Lv, Tao A <tao.a.lv@intel.com<mailto:
> > > > tao.a.lv@intel.com>> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > How to install the latest available build of a flavor without
> specifying
> > > > the build date? Something like `pip install mxnet --pre`.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > -tao
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Skalicky, Sam <sskalic@amazon.com.INVALID<mailto:
> > > > sskalic@amazon.com.INVALID>>
> > > > Sent: Monday, January 6, 2020 2:09 AM
> > > > To: dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org<mailto:
> dev@mxnet.incubator.apache.org>
> > > > Subject: Re: Stopping nightly releases to Pypi
> > > >
> > > > Hi Haibin,
> > > >
> > > > You typed the correct URLs, the cu100 build has been failing since
> > > > December 30th but other builds have succeeded. The wheels are being
> > > > delivered into a public bucket that anyone with an AWS account can
> access
> > > > and go poke around, here’s the URL for web access:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> https://s3.console.aws.amazon.com/s3/buckets/apache-mxnet/dist/2020-01-01/dist/?region=us-west-2&tab=overview
> > > >
> > > > You will have to log into your AWS account to access it however
> (which
> > > > means you’ll need an AWS account).
> > > >
> > > > It looks like only the following flavors are available for
> 2020-01-01:
> > > > mxnet
> > > > mxnet-cu92
> > > > mxnet-cu92mkl
> > > > mxnet-mkl
> > > >
> > > > Sam
> > > >
> > > > On Jan 4, 2020, at 9:06 PM, Haibin Lin <haibin.lin.aws@gmail.com
> <mailto:
> > > > haibin.lin.aws@gmail.com><mailto:haibin.lin.aws@gmail.com>>
wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I was trying the nightly builds, but none of them is available:
> > > >
> > > > pip3 install
> > > >
> > > >
> https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2020-01-01/dist/mxnet_cu100-1.6.0b20200101-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl
> > > > --user
> > > > <
> > > >
> https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2020-01-01/dist/mxnet_cu100-1.6.0b20200101-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl--user
> > > > >
> > > > pip3 install
> > > >
> > > >
> https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2020-01-02/dist/mxnet_cu100-1.6.0b20200102-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl
> > > > --user
> > > > <
> > > >
> https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2020-01-02/dist/mxnet_cu100-1.6.0b20200102-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl--user
> > > > >
> > > > pip3 install
> > > >
> > > >
> https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2020-01-03/dist/mxnet_cu100-1.6.0b20200103-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl
> > > > --user
> > > > <
> > > >
> https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2020-01-03/dist/mxnet_cu100-1.6.0b20200103-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl--user
> > > > >
> > > > pip3 install
> > > >
> > > >
> https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2020-01-04/dist/mxnet_cu100-1.6.0b20200104-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl
> > > > --user
> > > > <
> > > >
> https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2020-01-04/dist/mxnet_cu100-1.6.0b20200104-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl--user
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > ERROR: Could not install requirement mxnet-cu100==1.6.0b20200103 from
> > > >
> https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2020-01-03/dist/mxnet_cu100-1.6.0b20200103-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl
> > > > because of HTTP error 404 Client Error: Not Found for url:
> > > >
> > > >
> https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2020-01-03/dist/mxnet_cu100-1.6.0b20200103-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl
> > > > for URL
> > > >
> > > >
> https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2020-01-03/dist/mxnet_cu100-1.6.0b20200103-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl
> > > >
> > > > Please let me know if I typed wrong URLs.
> > > >
> > > > 1. The discoverability of available nightly builds needs
> improvement. If
> > > > someone can help write a script to list all links that exist, that
> would be
> > > > very helpful.
> > > > 2. If any nightly build is not built successfully, how do the
> community
> > > > know the reason of the failure, and potentially offer helps?
> Currently I
> > > > don't have much visibility of the nightly build status.
> > > >
> > > > Best,
> > > > Haibin
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Jan 3, 2020 at 5:47 PM Pedro Larroy <
> pedro.larroy.lists@gmail.com
> > > > <mailto:pedro.larroy.lists@gmail.com>>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Just to clarify, the current CI is quite an overhead to maintain for
> > > > several reasons, this complexity is overkill for CD. Jenkins also has
> > > > constant plugin upgrades, security vulnerabilities, has to be
> restarted
> > > > from time to time as it stops working... and to make binary builds
> from an
> > > > environment which runs unsafe code, I don't think is good practice.
> So for
> > > > that, having a separate Jenkins, CodeBuild, Drone or using a separate
> > > > Jenkins node is the right solution. Agree with you that is just a
> > > > scheduler, but somebody is making efforts to keep it running. If you
> have
> > > > the appetite and resources to duplicate it for CD please go ahead.
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Jan 3, 2020 at 3:25 PM Marco de Abreu <
> marco.g.abreu@gmail.com
> > > > <mailto:marco.g.abreu@gmail.com>>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Regarding your point of finding somebody to maintain the solution: At
> > > > Apache we usually retire things if there's no maintainer, since that
> > > > indicates that the feature/system is not of enough interest to
> warrant
> > > > maintenance - otherwise, someone would step up.
> > > >
> > > > While assistance in the form of a fix is always appreciated, the fix
> still
> > > > has to conform with the way this project and Apache operates. Next
> time I'd
> > > > recommend to contribute time on improving the existing community
> solution
> > > > instead of developing an internal system.
> > > >
> > > > -Marco
> > > >
> > > > Marco de Abreu <marco.g.abreu@gmail.com<mailto:
> marco.g.abreu@gmail.com>>
> > > > schrieb am Sa., 4. Jan. 2020,
> > > > 00:21:
> > > >
> > > > Sam, while I understand that this solution was developed out of
> necessity,
> > > > my question why a new system has been developed instead of fixing the
> > > > existing one or adapting the solution. CodeBuild is a scheduler in
> the same
> > > > fashion as Jenkins is. It runs code. So you can adapt it to Jenkins
> without
> > > > much hassle.
> > > >
> > > > I'm not volunteering for this - why should I? The role of a PMC
> member is
> > > > to steer the direction of the project. Just because a manager points
> > > > towards a certain direction, if doesn't mean that they're going to
> do it.
> > > >
> > > > Apparently there was enough time at some point to develop a new
> solution
> > > > from scratch. It might have been a solution for your internal team
> and
> > > > that's fine, but upgrading it "temporarily" to be the advertised way
> on the
> > > > official website is something different.
> > > >
> > > > I won't argue about how the veto can be enforced. I think it's in
> the best
> > > > interest of the project if we try working on a solution instead of
> spending
> > > > time on trying to figure out the power of the PMC.
> > > >
> > > > Pedro, that's certainly a step towards the right direction. But
> committers
> > > > would also need access to the control plane of the system - to
> trigger,
> > > > stop and audit builds. We could go down that road, but i think the
> fewer
> > > > systems, the better - also for the sake of maintainability.
> > > >
> > > > Best regards,
> > > > Marco
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Pedro Larroy <pedro.larroy.lists@gmail.com<mailto:
> > > > pedro.larroy.lists@gmail.com>> schrieb am Fr., 3. Jan.
> > > > 2020,
> > > > 20:55:
> > > >
> > > > I'm not involved in such efforts, but one possibility is to have the
> yaml
> > > > files that describe the pipelines for CD in the Apache repositories,
> would
> > > > that be acceptable from the Apache POV? In the end they should be
> very thin
> > > > and calling the scripts that are part of the CD packages.
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Jan 3, 2020 at 6:56 AM Marco de Abreu <
> marco.g.abreu@gmail.com
> > > > <mailto:marco.g.abreu@gmail.com>>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Agree, but the question how a non Amazonian is able to maintain and
> access
> > > > the system is still open. As it stands right now, the community has
> taken a
> > > > step back and loses some control if we continue down that road.
> > > >
> > > > I personally am disapproving of that approach since committers are no
> > > > longer in control of that process. So far it seems like my questions
> were
> > > > skipped and further actions have been taken. As openness and the
> community
> > > > having control are part of our graduation criteria, I'm putting in
> my veto
> > > > with a grace period until 15th of January. Please bring the system
> into a
> > > > state that aligns with Apache values or revert the changes.
> > > >
> > > > -Marco
> > > >
> > > > Pedro Larroy <pedro.larroy.lists@gmail.com<mailto:
> > > > pedro.larroy.lists@gmail.com>> schrieb am Fr., 3. Jan.
> > > > 2020,
> > > > 03:33:
> > > >
> > > > CD should be separate from CI for security reasons in any case.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, Dec 7, 2019 at 10:04 AM Marco de Abreu <
> marco.g.abreu@gmail.com
> > > > <mailto:marco.g.abreu@gmail.com>>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Could you elaborate how a non-Amazonian is able to access, maintain
> and
> > > > review the CodeBuild pipeline? How come we've diverted from the
> community
> > > > agreed-on standard where the public Jenkins serves for the purpose of
> > > > testing and releasing MXNet? I'd be curious about the issues you're
> > > > encountering with Jenkins CI that led to a non-standard solution.
> > > >
> > > > -Marco
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Skalicky, Sam <sskalic@amazon.com.invalid<mailto:
> > > > sskalic@amazon.com.invalid>> schrieb am Sa., 7.
> > > > Dez.
> > > > 2019,
> > > > 18:39:
> > > >
> > > > Hi MXNet Community,
> > > >
> > > > We have been working on getting nightly builds fixed and made
> available
> > > > again. We’ve made another system using AWS CodeBuild & S3 to work
> around
> > > > the problems with Jenkins CI, PyPI, etc. It is currently building
> all the
> > > > flavors and publishing to an S3 bucket here:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> https://us-west-2.console.aws.amazon.com/s3/buckets/apache-mxnet/dist/?region=us-west-2
> > > >
> > > > There are folders for each set of nightly builds, try out the wheels
> > > > starting today 2019-12-07. Builds start at 1:30am PT (9:30am
> > > > GMT)
> > > > and
> > > > arrive in the bucket 30min-2hours later. Inside each folder are the
> wheels
> > > > for each flavor of MXNet. Currently we’re only building for linux,
> builds
> > > > for windows/Mac will come later.
> > > >
> > > > If you want to download the wheels easily you can use a URL in the
> form
> > > > of:
> > > > https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > <YYYY-MM-DD>/dist/<mxnet_build>-1.6.0b<YYYYMMDD>-py2.py3-none-
> > > > manylinux1_x86_64.whl
> > > >
> > > > Heres a set of links for today’s builds
> > > >
> > > > (Plain mxnet, no mkl no cuda)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl
> > > > (mxnet-mkl
> > > > <
> > > >
> https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl(mxnet-mkl
> > > > >
> > > > <
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl(mxnet-mkl
> > > >
> > > > )
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet_mkl-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl
> > > > (mxnet-cuXXX
> > > > <
> > > >
> https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet_mkl-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl(mxnet-cuXXX
> > > > >
> > > > <
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet_mkl-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl(mxnet-cuXXX
> > > >
> > > > )
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet_cu90-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet_cu92-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet_cu100-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet_cu101-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl
> > > > (mxnet-cuXXXmkl
> > > > <
> > > >
> https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet_cu101-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl(mxnet-cuXXXmkl
> > > > >
> > > > <
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet_cu101-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl(mxnet-cuXXXmkl
> > > >
> > > > )
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet_cu90mkl-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet_cu92mkl-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet_cu100mkl-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet_cu101mkl-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl
> > > >
> > > > You can easily install these pip wheels in your system either by
> > > > downloading them to your machine first and then installing by
> > > > doing:
> > > >
> > > > pip install /path/to/downloaded/wheel.whl
> > > >
> > > > Or you can install directly by just giving the link to pip like
> > > > this:
> > > >
> > > > pip install
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl
> > > >
> > > > Credit goes to everyone involved (in no particular order) Rakesh
> Vasudevan
> > > > Zach Kimberg Manu Seth Sheng Zha Jun Wu Pedro Larroy Chaitanya Bapat
> > > >
> > > > Thanks!
> > > > Sam
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Dec 5, 2019, at 1:16 AM, Lausen, Leonard
> <lausen@amazon.com.INVALID
> > > > <mailto:lausen@amazon.com.INVALID> <mailto:lausen@amazon.com.INVALID
> >>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > We don't loose pip by hosting on S3. We just don't host nightly
> releases
> > > > on Pypi servers and mirror them to several hundred mirrors
> immediately
> > > > after each build is published which is very expensive for the Pypi
> project..
> > > > People
> > > > can
> > > > still
> > > > install the nightly builds with pip by specifying the -f option.
> > > >
> > > > Uploading weekly releases to Pypi will reduce the cost for Pypi by
> ~75%
> > > > [1]. It may be acceptable to Pypi, but does it make sense for us?
> I'm not
> > > > convinced weekly release on Pypi is a good idea. Consider one
> release is
> > > > buggy, users will need to wait for 7 days for a fix. It doesn't
> provide
> > > > good user experience.
> > > > If someone has a stronger conviction about the value of weekly
> releases on
> > > > Pypi, that person shall please go ahead and propose it in a separate
> > > > discussion thread.
> > > >
> > > > Currently we don't have generally working nightly builds to Pypi and
> as a
> > > > matter of fact we know that we can't have them due to Pypi's policy
> and our
> > > > apparent need for large binaries. Given this fact and that no
> objection was
> > > > raised by
> > > > 2019-12-05 at 05:42 UTC, I conclude we have lazy consensus on
> stopping
> > > > upload attempts of nightly builds to Pypi.
> > > >
> > > > With consensus established, we can change the CI job to stop trying
> to
> > > > upload the nightly builds and then request Pypi to increase the
> limit.
> > > > Then
> > > > we
> > > > have one
> > > > less blocker for the 1.6 release.
> > > >
> > > > Best regards
> > > > Leonard
> > > >
> > > > [1]: Lower cost due to less releases, but higher cost due to 500MB ->
> > > > 800MB limit increase. Assuming that the limit increase translates
> into
> > > > actually larger binaries.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, 2019-12-04 at 22:20 +0100, Marco de Abreu wrote:
> > > > Are weekly releases an option? It was brought up as concern that we
> might
> > > > lose pip as a pretty common distribution channel where people consume
> > > > nightly builds. I don't feel like that concern has been properly
> addressed
> > > > so far.
> > > >
> > > > -Marco
> > > >
> > > > Lausen, Leonard <lausen@amazon.com.invalid<mailto:
> > > > lausen@amazon.com.invalid><mailto:
> > > > lausen@amazon.com.invalid<mailto:lausen@amazon.com.invalid>>>
> schrieb am
> > > > Mi., 4. Dez. 2019,
> > > > 04:09:
> > > >
> > > > As a simple POC to test distribution, you can try installing MXNet
> based
> > > > on these 3 URLs:
> > > >
> > > > pip install --no-cache-dir
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> https://mxnet-dev.s3.amazonaws.com/mxnet_cu101-1.5.1.post0-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl
> > > > pip install --no-cache-dir
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> https://mxnet-dev.s3-accelerate.amazonaws.com/mxnet_cu101-1.5.1.post0-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl
> > > > pip install --no-cache-dir
> > > > https://d19zq12jzu4w95.cloudfront.net/
> > > > mxnet_cu101-1.5.1.post0-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl
> > > > <
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> https://d19zq12jzu4w95.cloudfront.net/mxnet_cu101-1.5.1.post0-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl
> > > >
> > > > <
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> https://d19zq12jzu4w95.cloudfront.net/mxnet_cu101-1.5.1.post0-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > where --no-cache-dir prevents caching the downloaded file, for the
> purpose
> > > > of testing. (cu101 chosen based on large size)
> > > >
> > > > The first URL uses standard S3 bucket in US. The second uses
> > > > S3
> > > > Accelerate
> > > > based
> > > > on CloudFront CDN. And the third uses CloudFront CDN. I'm adding the
> third
> > > > URL, as S3 Accelerate may or may not use all new CloudFront
> endpoints yet.
> > > >
> > > > Regarding voting: Uploading to Pypi is currently impossible, which
> is a
> > > > reality (so there is no option to continue as we do currently). Pypi
> folks
> > > > indicated they will unblock our uploads to Pypi once we stop
> uploading
> > > > nightly releases and taking up 20% of their ressources [1].
> > > >
> > > > If there are any shortcomings or problems identified with uploading
> to S3,
> > > > we can work to address them. But for now, status quo is broken and
> this
> > > > seems the only solution addressing Pypi's problem.
> > > >
> > > > I don't mind if you state that you object to lazy consensus and
> start a
> > > > vote. If your "maybe [...] start a proper vote" was supposed to be an
> > > > objection to lazy consensus, please state so clearly (I'm not sure if
> > > > "maybe"
> > > > qualifies
> > > > as
> > > > objection). Though I think it only makes sense with at least 2
> options to
> > > > vote on. Status quo is not a meaningful option, as it is already
> broken.
> > > >
> > > > Best regards
> > > > Leonard
> > > >
> > > > [1]:
> > > >
> > > >
> https://github.com/pypa/pypi-support/issues/50#issuecomment-560479706
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, 2019-12-03 at 19:28 +0100, Marco de Abreu wrote:
> > > > Excellent! Could we maybe come up with a POC and a quick writeup and
> then
> > > > start a proper vote after everyone verified that it covers their
> use-cases?
> > > > -Marco
> > > >
> > > > Sheng Zha <zhasheng@apache.org<mailto:zhasheng@apache.org>>
schrieb
> am
> > > > Di., 3. Dez. 2019,
> > > > 19:24:
> > > >
> > > > Yes, there is. We can also make it easier to access by using a
> > > > geo-location based DNS server so that China users are directed to
> that
> > > > local mirror. The rest of the world is already covered by the global
> > > > cloudfront.
> > > >
> > > > -sz
> > > >
> > > > On 2019/12/03 18:22:22, Marco de Abreu < marco.g.abreu@gmail.com
> <mailto:
> > > > marco.g.abreu@gmail.com>
> > > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > Isn't there an s3 endpoint in Beijing?
> > > >
> > > > It seems like this topic still warrants some discussion and thus I'd
> > > >
> > > > prefer
> > > > if we don't move forward with lazy consensus.
> > > >
> > > > -Marco
> > > >
> > > > Tao Lv <mutouorz@gmail.com<mailto:mutouorz@gmail.com>> schrieb
am
> Di., 3.
> > > > Dez. 2019,
> > > > 14:31:
> > > >
> > > > * For pypi, we can use mirrors.
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Dec 3, 2019 at 9:28 PM Tao Lv <mutouorz@gmail.com<mailto:
> > > > mutouorz@gmail.com>>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > As we have many users in China, I'm considering the accessibility of
> S3.
> > > > For pip, we can mirrors.
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Dec 3, 2019 at 3:24 PM Lausen, Leonard
> > > >
> > > > <lausen@amazon.com.invalid<mailto:lausen@amazon.com.invalid>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I would like to remind everyone that lazy consensus is assumed if no
> > > > objections are raised before 2019-12-05 at 05:42 UTC. There has been
> some
> > > >
> > > > discussion
> > > > about
> > > > the proposal, but to my understanding no objections were raised.
> > > > If the proposal is accepted, MXNet releases would be installed via
> pip
> > > > install mxnet
> > > >
> > > > And release candidates via
> > > >
> > > > pip install --pre mxnet
> > > >
> > > > (or with the respective cuda version specifier appended etc.)
> > > >
> > > > To obtain releases built automatically from the master branch, users
> would
> > > > need to specify something like "-f
> > > > http://mxnet.s3.amazonaws.com/mxnet-X/nightly.html" option to pip.
> > > > Best regards
> > > > Leonard
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, 2019-12-02 at 05:42 +0000, Lausen, Leonard wrote:
> > > > Hi MXNet Community,
> > > >
> > > > since more than 2 months our binary Python nightly releases
> > > >
> > > > published
> > > > on Pypi
> > > > are broken. The problem is that our binaries exceed Pypi's size
> limit.
> > > > Decreasing the binary size by adding compression breaks
> > > >
> > > > third-party
> > > > libraries
> > > > loading libmxnet.so
> > > >
> > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues/16193
> > > > Sheng requested Pypi to increase their size limit:
> > > > https://github.com/pypa/pypi-support/issues/50
> > > >
> > > > Currently "the biggest cost for PyPI from [the many MXNet binaries
> with
> > > > nightly release to Pypi] is the bandwidth consumed when several
> hundred
> > > > mirrors attempt to mirror each release immediately after it's
> published".
> > > > So Pypi is not inclined to allow us to upload even larger binaries
> on a
> > > > nightly schedule.
> > > > Their compromise is to allow it on a weekly cadence.
> > > >
> > > > However, I would like the community to revisit the necessity of
> releasing
> > > > pre- release binaries to Pypi on a nightly (or weekly) cadence.
> > > >
> > > > Instead, we
> > > > can
> > > > release nightly binaries ONLY to a public S3 bucket and instruct
> users to
> > > > install from there. On our side, we only need to prepare a html
> document
> > > > that contains links to all released nightly binaries.
> > > > Finally users will install the nightly releases via
> > > >
> > > > pip install --pre mxnet-cu101 -f
> > > >
> > > > http://mxnet.s3.amazonaws.com/mxnet-cu101/
> > > > nightly.html
> > > >
> > > > Instead of
> > > >
> > > > pip install --pre mxnet-cu101
> > > >
> > > > Of course proper releases and release candidates should still be made
> > > > available via Pypi. Thus releases would be installed via
> > > >
> > > > pip install mxnet-cu101
> > > >
> > > > And release candidates via
> > > >
> > > > pip install --pre mxnet-cu101
> > > >
> > > > This will substantially reduce the costs of the Pypi project and in
> fact
> > > > matches the installation experience provided by PyTorch. I don't
> think the
> > > > benefit of not including "-f
> > > >
> > > > http://mxnet.s3.amazonaws.com/mxnet-cu101/nightly.html"
> > > > matches the costs we currently externalize to the Pypi team.
> > > >
> > > > This suggestion seems uncontroversial to me. Thus I would like to
> start
> > > > lazy consensus. If there are no objections, I will assume lazy
> > > >
> > > > consensus on
> > > > stopping
> > > > nightly releases to Pypi in 72hrs.
> > > >
> > > > Best regards
> > > > Leonard
> > > >
> > > >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message