I'm trying to log data points for the same metric across multiple runs (wandb.init is called repeatedly in between each data point) and I'm unsure how to avoid the behavior seen in the attached screenshot...
Instead of getting a line chart with multiple points, I'm getting a single data point with associated statistics. In the attached e.g., the 1st data point was generated at step 1,470 and the 2nd at step 2,940...rather than seeing two points, I'm instead getting a single point that's the average and appears at step 2,205.
My hunch is that using the resume run feature may address my problem, but even testing out this hunch is proving to be cumbersome given the constraints of the system I'm working with...
Before I invest more time in my hypothesized solution, could someone confirm that the behavior I'm seeing is, indeed, the result of logging data to the same metric across separate runs without using the resume feature?
If this is the case, can you confirm or deny my conception of how to use resume?
Initial run:
run = wandb.init()
wandb_id = run.id
cache wandb_id for successive runs
Successive run:
retrieve wandb_id from cache
wandb.init(id=wandb_id, resume="must")
Is it also acceptable / preferable to replace 1. and 2. of the initial run with:
wandb_id = wandb.util.generate_id()
wandb.init(id=wandb_id)
It looks like you’re grouping runs so that could be why it’s appearing as averaging across step - this might not be the case but it’s worth trying. Turn off grouping by clicking the button in the centre above your runs table on the left - it’s highlighted in purple in the image below.
Both of the ways you’re suggesting resuming runs seem fine.
My hunch is that using the resume run feature may address my problem,
Indeed, providing a cached id in combination with resume="must" fixed the issue.
Corresponding snippet:
import wandb
# wandb run associated with evaluation after first N epochs of training.
wandb_id = wandb.util.generate_id()
wandb.init(id=wandb_id, project="alrichards", name="test-run-3/job-1", group="test-run-3")
wandb.log({"mean_evaluate_loss_epoch": 20}, step=1)
wandb.finish()
# wandb run associated with evaluation after second N epochs of training.
wandb.init(id=wandb_id, resume="must", project="alrichards", name="test-run-3/job-2", group="test-run-3")
wandb.log({"mean_evaluate_loss_epoch": 10}, step=5)
wandb.finish()
Related
I am using opencv and openvino and am trying to figure out when I have a face detected, use the cv2.rectangle and have my coordinates sent but only on the first person bounded by the box so it can move the motors because when it sees multiple people it sends multiple coordinates and thus causing the servo and stepper motors to go crazy. Any help would be appreciated. Thank you
Generally, each code would run line by line. You'll need to create a proper function for each scenario so that the data could be handled and processed properly. In short, you'll need to implement error handling and data handling (probably more than these, depending on your software/hardware design). If you are trying to implement multiple threads of executions at the same time, it is better to use multithreading.
Besides, you are using 2 types of motors. Simply taking in all data is inefficient and prone to cause missing data. You'll need to be clear about what servo motor and stepper motor tasks are, the relations between coordinates, who will trigger what, if something fails or some sequence is missing then do task X, etc.
For example, the sequence of Data A should produce Result A but it is halted halfway because Data B went into the buffer and interfered with Result A and at the same time screwed Result B which was anticipated to happen. (This is what happened in your program)
It's good to review and design your whole process by creating a coding flowchart (a diagram that represents an algorithm). It will give you a clear idea of what should happen for each sequence of code. Then, design a proper handler for each situation.
Can you share more insights of your (pseudo-)code, please?
It sounds easy - you trigger a face-detection inference-request and you get a list/vector with all detected faces (the region-of-interest for each detected face) (including false-positive and false-positives, requiring some consistency-checks to filter those).
If you are interested in the first detected face only - then it could be to just process the first returned result from the list/vector.
However, you will see that sometimes the order of results might change, i.e. when 2 faces A and B were detected, in the next run it could still return faces, but B first and then A.
You could add object-tracking on top of face-detection to make sure you always process the same face.
(But even that could fail sometimes)
I am very impressed with Dask and I am trying to determine if it is the right tool for my problem. I am building a project for interactive data exploration where users can interactively change parameters of a figure. Sometimes these changes requires re-computing the entire pipeline to make the graph (e.g. "show data from a different time interval"), but sometimes not. For instance, "change the smoothing parameter" should not require the system to reload the raw unsmoothed data, because the underlying data is the same, only the processing changes. The system should instead use the existing raw data that has already been loaded. I would like my system to be able to keep around the intermediate data objects and intelligently determine what tasks in the graph need to be re-run based on what parameters of the data visualization have been changed. It looks like the caching system in Dask is close to what I need, but was designed with a bit of a different use-case in mind. I see there is a persist method, but I'm not sure if that would work either. Is there an easy way to accomplish this in Dask, or is there another project that would be more appropriate?
"change the smoothing parameter" should not require the system to reload the raw unsmoothed data
Two options:
The builtin functools.lru_cache will cache every unique input. The check on memory is with the maxsize parameter, which controls how many input/output pairs are stored.
Using persist in the right places will compute that object as mentioned at https://distributed.dask.org/en/latest/manage-computation.html#client-persist. It will not require re-running computation to get the object in later computation; functionally, it's the same as lru_cache.
For example, this code will read from disk twice:
>>> import dask.dataframe as dd
>>> df = dd.read_csv(...)
>>> # df = df.persist() # uncommenting this line → only read from disk once
>>> df[df.x > 0].mean().compute()
24.9
>>> df[df.y > 0].mean().compute()
0.1
Uncommented the line will mean this code only reads from disk once because the task graph for the CSV is computed and the value is stored in memory. For your application is sounds like I would use persist intelligently: https://docs.dask.org/en/latest/best-practices.html#persist-when-you-can
What if two smoothing parameters want to be visualized? In that case, I'd avoid calling compute repeatedly: https://docs.dask.org/en/latest/best-practices.html#avoid-calling-compute-repeatedly
lower, upper = client.compute(df.x.min(), df.x.max())
This will share the task graph for min and max so unnecessary computation is not performed.
I would like my system to be able to keep around the intermediate data objects and intelligently determine what tasks in the graph need to be re-run based on what parameters of the data visualization have been changed.
Dask Distributed has a smart caching ability: https://docs.dask.org/en/latest/caching.html#automatic-opportunistic-caching. Part of the documentation says
Another approach is to watch all intermediate computations, and guess which ones might be valuable to keep for the future. Dask has an opportunistic caching mechanism that stores intermediate tasks that show the following characteristics:
Expensive to compute
Cheap to store
Frequently used
I think this is what you're looking for; it'll store values depending on those attributes.
I am working on some fairly complex application that is making use of Dask framework, trying to increase the performance. To that end I am looking at the diagnostics dashboard. I have two use-cases. On first I have a 1GB parquet file split in 50 parts, and on second use case I have the first part of the above file, split over 5 parts, which is what used for the following charts:
The red node is called "memory:list" and I do not understand what it is.
When running the bigger input this seems to block the whole operation.
Finally this is what I see when I go inside those nodes:
I am not sure where I should start looking to understand what is generating this memory:list node, especially given how there is no stack button inside the task as it often happens. Any suggestions ?
Red nodes are in memory. So this computation has occurred, and the result is sitting in memory on some machine.
It looks like the type of the piece of data is a Python list object. Also, the name of the task is list-159..., so probably this is the result of calling the list Python function.
Using Prometheus for things that are per second works really great and I've had great success with rate and irate. I am just at a loss how to graph something that's happening very rarely and is a big deal.
So I have a counter I am incrementing that's called job_failed. Whenever that happens it shows up in my instant-vector. If I graph it directly it always goes up and I see a bump in the graph, but this isn't giving me clear enough indication that a job has failed. So I'd like to have it be a spike in a zeroed graph.
If I do a rate(job_failed[15s]) I get my spike - but it's a per second spike so it's value is 0.1 although the change I want is 1.
I tried increase(job_failed[1m]) but that is also not adding up correctly, occasionally leaving me with values like 2.18 etc.
Is there a way to only see a single spike? This seems like a rather trivial thing but I can't figure it out.
Prometheus is suited more to high volume than low volume events, as at low volumes artifacts from how we keep things accurate on average show up.
So for example rate(job_failed[15s]) with an increase of 1 over the 15 seconds is 1/15 = 0.066/s. Rounding could make that show as 0.1.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=67Ulrq6DxwA goes into more detail as to how this all works.
The short version is what you're doing now is the way to do it.
For similar requirement, I was using delta function with threshold configured as per requirement.
https://prometheus.io/docs/querying/functions/#delta
I want to de-dupe a stream of data based on an ID in a windowed fashion. The stream we receive has and we want to remove data with matching within N-hour time windows. A straight-forward approach is to use an external key-store (BigTable or something similar) where we look-up for keys and write if required but our qps is extremely large making maintaining such a service pretty hard. The alternative approach I came up with was to groupBy within a timewindow so that all data for a user within a time-window falls within the same group and then, in each group, we use a separate key-store service where we look up for duplicates by the key. So, I have a few questions about this approach
[1] If I run a groupBy transform, is there any guarantee that each group will be processed in the same slave? If guaranteed, we can group by the userid and then within each group compare the sessionid for each user
[2] If it is feasible, my next question is to whether we can run such other services in each of the slave machines that run the job - in the example above, I would like to have a local Redis running which can then be used by each group to look up or write an ID too.
The idea seems off what Dataflow is supposed to do but I believe such use cases should be common - so if there is a better model to approach this problem, I am looking forward to that too. We essentially want to avoid external lookups as much as possible given the amount of data we have.
1) In the Dataflow model, there is no guarantee that the same machine will see all the groups across windows for the key. Imagine that a VM dies or new VMs are added and work is split across them for scaling.
2) Your welcome to run other services on the Dataflow VMs since they are general purpose but note that you will have to contend with resource requirements of the other applications on the host potentially causing out of memory issues.
Note that you may want to take a look at RemoveDuplicates and use that if it fits your usecase.
It also seems like you might want to be using session windows to dedupe elements. You would call:
PCollection<T> pc = ...;
PCollection<T> windowed_pc = pc.apply(
Window<T>into(Sessions.withGapDuration(Duration.standardMinutes(N hours))));
Each new element will keep extending the length of the window so it won't close until the gap closes. If you also apply an AfterCount speculative trigger of 1 with an AfterWatermark trigger on a downstream GroupByKey. The trigger would fire as soon as it could which would be once it has seen at least one element and then once more when the session closes. After the GroupByKey you would have a DoFn that filters out an element which isn't an early firing based upon the pane information ([3], [4]).
DoFn(T -> KV<session key, T>)
|
\|/
Window.into(Session window)
|
\|/
Group by key
|
\|/
DoFn(Filter based upon pane information)
It is sort of unclear from your description, can you provide more details?
Sorry for not being clear. I gave the setup you mentioned a try, except for the early and late firings part, and it is working on smaller samples. I have a couple of follow up questions, related to scaling this up. Also, I was hoping I could give you more information on what the exact scenario is.
So, we have incoming data stream, each item of which can be uniquely identified by their fields. We also know that duplicates occur pretty far apart and for now, we care about those within a 6 hour window. And regarding the volume of data, we have atleast 100K events every second, which span across a million different users - so within this 6 hour window, we could get a few billion events into the pipeline.
Given this background, my questions are
[1] For the sessioning to happen by key, I should run it on something like
PCollection<KV<key, T>> windowed_pc = pc.apply(
Window<KV<key,T>>into(Sessions.withGapDuration(Duration.standardMinutes(6 hours))));
where key is a combination of the 3 ids I had mentioned earlier. Based on the definition of Sessions, only if I run it on this KV would I be able to manage sessions per-key. This would mean that Dataflow would have too many open sessions at any given time waiting for them to close and I was worried if it would scale or I would run into any bottle-necks.
[2] Once I perform Sessioning as above, I have already removed the duplicates based on the firings since I will only care about the first firing in each session which already destroys duplicates. I no longer need the RemoveDuplicates transform which I found was a combination of (WithKeys, Combine.PerKey, Values) transforms in order, essentially performing the same operation. Is this the right assumption to make?
[3] If the solution in [1] going to be a problem, the alternative is to reduce the key for sessioning to be just user-id, session-id ignoring the sequence-id and then, running a RemoveDuplicates on top of each resulting window by sequence-id. This might reduce the number of open sessions but still would leave a lot of open sessions (#users * #sessions per user) which can easily run into millions. FWIW, I dont think we can session only by user-id since then the session might never close as different sessions for same user could keep coming in and also determining the session gap in this scenario becomes infeasible.
Hope my problem is a little more clear this time. Please let me know any of my approaches make the best use of Dataflow or if I am missing something.
Thanks
I tried out this solution at a larger scale and as long as I provide sufficient workers and disks, the pipeline scales well although I am seeing a different problem now.
After this sessionization, I run a Combine.perKey on the key and then perform a ParDo which looks into c.pane().getTiming() and only rejects anything other than an EARLY firing. I tried counting both EARLY and ONTIME firings in this ParDo and it looks like the ontime-panes are actually deduped more precisely than the early ones. I mean, the #early-firings still has some duplicates whereas the #ontime-firings is less than that and has more duplicates removed. Is there any reason this could happen? Also, is my approach towards deduping using a Combine+ParDo the right one or could I do something better?
events.apply(
WithKeys.<String, EventInfo>of(new SerializableFunction<EventInfo, String>() {
#Override
public java.lang.String apply(EventInfo input) {
return input.getUniqueKey();
}
})
)
.apply(
Window.named("sessioner").<KV<String, EventInfo>>into(
Sessions.withGapDuration(mSessionGap)
)
.triggering(
AfterWatermark.pastEndOfWindow()
.withEarlyFirings(AfterPane.elementCountAtLeast(1))
)
.withAllowedLateness(Duration.ZERO)
.accumulatingFiredPanes()
);