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.ab...@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 <sska...@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_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_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 <lau...@amazon.com.INVALID > > <mailto:lau...@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 <lau...@amazon.com.invalid<mailto: > > lau...@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 <zhash...@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.ab...@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 <mutou...@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 <mutou...@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 > > > > <lau...@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 > > > > >
