Re: Removal of ignite ml module (or moving it to extensions)
PRs have been merged. Many thanks for review to Nikita Amelchev and Aleksei Zinoviev пт, 25 авг. 2023 г. в 17:05, Nikita Amelchev : > +1 for moving to extensions > > This module is good as an extension: > - does not depend on the internal Ignite API, > - the released module will be compatible with any required version of > Ignite using the provided dependency scope. > > Ivan, I have reviewed your patch, LGTM. > > чт, 17 авг. 2023 г. в 17:06, Dmitry Pavlov : > > > > +1 for Apache Way in decision making (it states there should not be time > pressure for the decision making). > > > > 0 for removal > > 0 for moving to extensions > > > > but since Aleksei is an expert here, it makes sense to me to wait for > him. > > > > Sincerely, > > Dmitriy Pavlov > > > > On 2023/08/16 17:32:55 Aleksei Zinovev wrote: > > > Hi, I have objection for fast merging, (not for moving) as a module > > > maintainer. > > > > > > I never used ignite extension, need a time to be familiar with it and > test > > > the pr. > > > > > > Please postpone it till 10 september. > > > > > > I don't understand reasons to do it so fast. I suppose it's ok to wait > > > 15-20 days with PR > > > > > > Thanks for collaboration and doing this work. > > > > > > > -- > Best wishes, > Amelchev Nikita > -- Sincerely yours, Ivan Daschinskiy
Re: Removal of ignite ml module (or moving it to extensions)
+1 for moving to extensions This module is good as an extension: - does not depend on the internal Ignite API, - the released module will be compatible with any required version of Ignite using the provided dependency scope. Ivan, I have reviewed your patch, LGTM. чт, 17 авг. 2023 г. в 17:06, Dmitry Pavlov : > > +1 for Apache Way in decision making (it states there should not be time > pressure for the decision making). > > 0 for removal > 0 for moving to extensions > > but since Aleksei is an expert here, it makes sense to me to wait for him. > > Sincerely, > Dmitriy Pavlov > > On 2023/08/16 17:32:55 Aleksei Zinovev wrote: > > Hi, I have objection for fast merging, (not for moving) as a module > > maintainer. > > > > I never used ignite extension, need a time to be familiar with it and test > > the pr. > > > > Please postpone it till 10 september. > > > > I don't understand reasons to do it so fast. I suppose it's ok to wait > > 15-20 days with PR > > > > Thanks for collaboration and doing this work. > > -- Best wishes, Amelchev Nikita
Re: Removal of ignite ml module (or moving it to extensions)
+1 for Apache Way in decision making (it states there should not be time pressure for the decision making). 0 for removal 0 for moving to extensions but since Aleksei is an expert here, it makes sense to me to wait for him. Sincerely, Dmitriy Pavlov On 2023/08/16 17:32:55 Aleksei Zinovev wrote: > Hi, I have objection for fast merging, (not for moving) as a module > maintainer. > > I never used ignite extension, need a time to be familiar with it and test > the pr. > > Please postpone it till 10 september. > > I don't understand reasons to do it so fast. I suppose it's ok to wait > 15-20 days with PR > > Thanks for collaboration and doing this work. >
Re: Removal of ignite ml module (or moving it to extensions)
Hi, I have objection for fast merging, (not for moving) as a module maintainer. I never used ignite extension, need a time to be familiar with it and test the pr. Please postpone it till 10 september. I don't understand reasons to do it so fast. I suppose it's ok to wait 15-20 days with PR Thanks for collaboration and doing this work.
Re: Removal of ignite ml module (or moving it to extensions)
ML Extensions suite is ready and it works, all tests from the main module and parsers, all examples -- everything works and all green [1]. The green visa has been obtained. So I am going to merge it tomorrow, if there is no objection. [1] --- https://ci.ignite.apache.org/buildConfiguration/IgniteExtensions_Tests_Ml/7438920?hideProblemsFromDependencies=false=false
Re: Removal of ignite ml module (or moving it to extensions)
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-20216 Also, I've updated dependencies and fixed BLAS issue (tested with intel mkl blas on ubuntu 22.04) ср, 16 авг. 2023 г. в 12:11, Ivan Daschinsky : > I've filed a ticket and created 2 PRs. After tuning of TC I'm going to > merge both of them, if nobody disagrees with it. > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-20216 > > > > пн, 14 авг. 2023 г. в 22:29, Ivan Daschinsky : > >> >> * com.github.fommil.netlib:core:1.1.2 - not developed and archived >> since 2017. Last version released in 2013 [2] >> Moreover, this version is so outdated and JNI extension was so strangely >> made (linked to libgfortran3 for example), that native BLAS simply doesn't >> work. >> Always fallback option is used (f2jBLAS, and it is also outdated). >> There is a modern option -- https://github.com/luhenry/netlib, it is >> used in spark mllib. >> >> I have run all tests successfully with it (with few lines changed, of >> course) using native blas (libopenblas on ubuntu 22.04) >> >> So it is possible to state that nobody has run it on native blas. So I >> have some concerns about existence of prod like installations with Ignite >> ML module >> >> пт, 11 авг. 2023 г. в 13:14, Николай Ижиков : >> >>> A few cents to let you know how abandoned ML module is. >>> >>> 1. Last valuable commit December 9, 2020 - >>> https://github.com/apache/ignite/commit/04f6a33851d9f7bd269a09fdc2c74485b1e01a8a >>> >>> 2. Dependencies and current versions of them: >>> >>> * com.dropbox.core:dropbox-core-sdk:2.1.1 current version is - 5.4.5 >>> [1] >>> * com.github.fommil.netlib:core:1.1.2 - not developed and archived >>> since 2017. Last version released in 2013 [2] >>> * org.apache.commons:commons-rng-core:1.0 current version is 1.5 [3] >>> * com.zaxxer:SparseBitSet:1.0 current version is 1.2 [4] >>> * ai.catboost:catboost-prediction:0.24 current version is 1.2 [5] >>> * ai.h2o:h2o-genmodel:3.26.0.8 current version is 3.42.0.2 [6] >>> >>> ML community make a huge step forward since 2020. >>> So I doubt ML features and tools integrations works as expected nowadays. >>> Those type of Ignite features(abandoned or supported partially) has to >>> be in extensions. >>> >>> [1] https://github.com/dropbox/dropbox-sdk-java >>> [2] https://github.com/fommil/netlib-java >>> [3] https://commons.apache.org/proper/commons-rng/commons-rng-core/ >>> [4] https://github.com/brettwooldridge/SparseBitSet >>> [5] https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/ai.catboost/catboost-prediction >>> [6] https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/ai.h2o/h2o-genmodel >>> >>> >>> >>> > 11 авг. 2023 г., в 12:19, Kseniya Romanova >>> написал(а): >>> > >>> > As far as I know, the integration was removed from the Tensorflow side. >>> > >>> > On Thu, Aug 10, 2023 at 2:04 PM Andrey Mashenkov < >>> andrey.mashen...@gmail.com> >>> > wrote: >>> > >>> >> Ivan, >>> >> >>> >>> Actually, I haven't found any integration with tensorflow in AI code. >>> >> >>> >> Ok. You are right. >>> >> Tensorflow is mentioned in docs: docs/_docs/setup.adoc. >>> >> >>> >> Adapters may require compilation time dependencies, but these >>> dependencies >>> >> shouldn't be part or release package, >>> >> regardless whether the ML module is a part of Ignite or extensions. >>> WDYT? >>> >> >>> >> On Thu, Aug 10, 2023 at 1:36 PM Ivan Daschinsky >>> >> wrote: >>> >> >>> >>> Actually, I haven't found any integration with tensorflow in AI code. >>> >>> Actually, all integrations are some adapters that allow to load >>> >> pretrained >>> >>> models (h2o, catboost etc.) >>> >>> >>> >>> чт, 10 авг. 2023 г. в 13:08, Ivan Daschinsky : >>> >>> >>> I am personally for moving to extensions. Alex has already mentioned >>> >> all >>> the reasons why it should be done and all of them are quite >>> important. >>> The module seems to be quite independent and there is no problem to >>> >> move >>> it to ignite-extensions. >>> So I am +1 for moving to ignite-extensions. >>> >>> >>> чт, 10 авг. 2023 г. в 12:45, Kseniya Romanova < >>> ksroman...@apache.org>: >>> >>> >> >>> >> do you know anyone who uses it? >>> > >>> > I know some teams, who do. At the last Ignite Summit we had a talk >>> > featuring Ml module (from the Groovy community). >>> > Anyway, We need here the module maintainer opinion >>> > + Alex >>> > >>> > On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 3:38 PM Andrey Mashenkov < >>> > andrey.mashen...@gmail.com> >>> > wrote: >>> > >>> >> -1 for removal. >>> >> 0 for relocation >>> >> >>> >> imho, TC resources and module size aren't good arguments for >>> >> removal/moving. >>> >> ML tests could be run nightly. >>> >> ML module contains few integrations (with TensorFlow and other), >>> >> these >>> >> optional integrations are wighty and could be moved to extension, >>> >> but core functionality still can be left untouched if it is highly >>> > coupled >>> >> with
Re: Removal of ignite ml module (or moving it to extensions)
Hi, as PMC and maintainer of this module -1 for removal +1 for moving to an extension, if it is compatible with the Ignite and could be compiled separately from other extension modules Some facts: - nobody updates it for latest 3 years—it's true - classic ML algorithms are not changed in the latest 3 years (we have not supported DL as a part of the module, it's not a goal, Random Forest was not changed latest 20 years) as a CSV parsing or JDBC - Tensorflow integration was removed 3 years ago - some people contacted me a few weeks ago to fix or develop some features in the Ignite ML urgent, but I have no time to do it urgent - I met some companies who used IgniteML in 2021 and 2022 including my job interview:) - I agree with the blas issue, great if somebody could update it, again I could help with testing I could help with the review of the PR on the github with moving to an extension, please assign on me @zaleslaw, but now I am on vacation, could do it in September
Re: Removal of ignite ml module (or moving it to extensions)
I've filed a ticket and created 2 PRs. After tuning of TC I'm going to merge both of them, if nobody disagrees with it. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-20216 пн, 14 авг. 2023 г. в 22:29, Ivan Daschinsky : > >> * com.github.fommil.netlib:core:1.1.2 - not developed and archived > since 2017. Last version released in 2013 [2] > Moreover, this version is so outdated and JNI extension was so strangely > made (linked to libgfortran3 for example), that native BLAS simply doesn't > work. > Always fallback option is used (f2jBLAS, and it is also outdated). > There is a modern option -- https://github.com/luhenry/netlib, it is used > in spark mllib. > > I have run all tests successfully with it (with few lines changed, of > course) using native blas (libopenblas on ubuntu 22.04) > > So it is possible to state that nobody has run it on native blas. So I > have some concerns about existence of prod like installations with Ignite > ML module > > пт, 11 авг. 2023 г. в 13:14, Николай Ижиков : > >> A few cents to let you know how abandoned ML module is. >> >> 1. Last valuable commit December 9, 2020 - >> https://github.com/apache/ignite/commit/04f6a33851d9f7bd269a09fdc2c74485b1e01a8a >> >> 2. Dependencies and current versions of them: >> >> * com.dropbox.core:dropbox-core-sdk:2.1.1 current version is - 5.4.5 [1] >> * com.github.fommil.netlib:core:1.1.2 - not developed and archived >> since 2017. Last version released in 2013 [2] >> * org.apache.commons:commons-rng-core:1.0 current version is 1.5 [3] >> * com.zaxxer:SparseBitSet:1.0 current version is 1.2 [4] >> * ai.catboost:catboost-prediction:0.24 current version is 1.2 [5] >> * ai.h2o:h2o-genmodel:3.26.0.8 current version is 3.42.0.2 [6] >> >> ML community make a huge step forward since 2020. >> So I doubt ML features and tools integrations works as expected nowadays. >> Those type of Ignite features(abandoned or supported partially) has to be >> in extensions. >> >> [1] https://github.com/dropbox/dropbox-sdk-java >> [2] https://github.com/fommil/netlib-java >> [3] https://commons.apache.org/proper/commons-rng/commons-rng-core/ >> [4] https://github.com/brettwooldridge/SparseBitSet >> [5] https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/ai.catboost/catboost-prediction >> [6] https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/ai.h2o/h2o-genmodel >> >> >> >> > 11 авг. 2023 г., в 12:19, Kseniya Romanova >> написал(а): >> > >> > As far as I know, the integration was removed from the Tensorflow side. >> > >> > On Thu, Aug 10, 2023 at 2:04 PM Andrey Mashenkov < >> andrey.mashen...@gmail.com> >> > wrote: >> > >> >> Ivan, >> >> >> >>> Actually, I haven't found any integration with tensorflow in AI code. >> >> >> >> Ok. You are right. >> >> Tensorflow is mentioned in docs: docs/_docs/setup.adoc. >> >> >> >> Adapters may require compilation time dependencies, but these >> dependencies >> >> shouldn't be part or release package, >> >> regardless whether the ML module is a part of Ignite or extensions. >> WDYT? >> >> >> >> On Thu, Aug 10, 2023 at 1:36 PM Ivan Daschinsky >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >>> Actually, I haven't found any integration with tensorflow in AI code. >> >>> Actually, all integrations are some adapters that allow to load >> >> pretrained >> >>> models (h2o, catboost etc.) >> >>> >> >>> чт, 10 авг. 2023 г. в 13:08, Ivan Daschinsky : >> >>> >> I am personally for moving to extensions. Alex has already mentioned >> >> all >> the reasons why it should be done and all of them are quite >> important. >> The module seems to be quite independent and there is no problem to >> >> move >> it to ignite-extensions. >> So I am +1 for moving to ignite-extensions. >> >> >> чт, 10 авг. 2023 г. в 12:45, Kseniya Romanova > >: >> >> >> >> >> do you know anyone who uses it? >> > >> > I know some teams, who do. At the last Ignite Summit we had a talk >> > featuring Ml module (from the Groovy community). >> > Anyway, We need here the module maintainer opinion >> > + Alex >> > >> > On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 3:38 PM Andrey Mashenkov < >> > andrey.mashen...@gmail.com> >> > wrote: >> > >> >> -1 for removal. >> >> 0 for relocation >> >> >> >> imho, TC resources and module size aren't good arguments for >> >> removal/moving. >> >> ML tests could be run nightly. >> >> ML module contains few integrations (with TensorFlow and other), >> >> these >> >> optional integrations are wighty and could be moved to extension, >> >> but core functionality still can be left untouched if it is highly >> > coupled >> >> with core Ignite and moving to extension is hard. >> >> >> >> >> >> On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 3:22 PM Anton Vinogradov >> >>> wrote: >> >> >> >>> +1 to relocation >> >>> >> >>> On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 3:09 PM Alex Plehanov < >> >>> plehanov.a...@gmail.com >> >> >> >>> wrote: >> >>> >> Pavel, do you know anyone who
Re: Removal of ignite ml module (or moving it to extensions)
>> * com.github.fommil.netlib:core:1.1.2 - not developed and archived since 2017. Last version released in 2013 [2] Moreover, this version is so outdated and JNI extension was so strangely made (linked to libgfortran3 for example), that native BLAS simply doesn't work. Always fallback option is used (f2jBLAS, and it is also outdated). There is a modern option -- https://github.com/luhenry/netlib, it is used in spark mllib. I have run all tests successfully with it (with few lines changed, of course) using native blas (libopenblas on ubuntu 22.04) So it is possible to state that nobody has run it on native blas. So I have some concerns about existence of prod like installations with Ignite ML module пт, 11 авг. 2023 г. в 13:14, Николай Ижиков : > A few cents to let you know how abandoned ML module is. > > 1. Last valuable commit December 9, 2020 - > https://github.com/apache/ignite/commit/04f6a33851d9f7bd269a09fdc2c74485b1e01a8a > > 2. Dependencies and current versions of them: > > * com.dropbox.core:dropbox-core-sdk:2.1.1 current version is - 5.4.5 [1] > * com.github.fommil.netlib:core:1.1.2 - not developed and archived since > 2017. Last version released in 2013 [2] > * org.apache.commons:commons-rng-core:1.0 current version is 1.5 [3] > * com.zaxxer:SparseBitSet:1.0 current version is 1.2 [4] > * ai.catboost:catboost-prediction:0.24 current version is 1.2 [5] > * ai.h2o:h2o-genmodel:3.26.0.8 current version is 3.42.0.2 [6] > > ML community make a huge step forward since 2020. > So I doubt ML features and tools integrations works as expected nowadays. > Those type of Ignite features(abandoned or supported partially) has to be > in extensions. > > [1] https://github.com/dropbox/dropbox-sdk-java > [2] https://github.com/fommil/netlib-java > [3] https://commons.apache.org/proper/commons-rng/commons-rng-core/ > [4] https://github.com/brettwooldridge/SparseBitSet > [5] https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/ai.catboost/catboost-prediction > [6] https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/ai.h2o/h2o-genmodel > > > > > 11 авг. 2023 г., в 12:19, Kseniya Romanova > написал(а): > > > > As far as I know, the integration was removed from the Tensorflow side. > > > > On Thu, Aug 10, 2023 at 2:04 PM Andrey Mashenkov < > andrey.mashen...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > >> Ivan, > >> > >>> Actually, I haven't found any integration with tensorflow in AI code. > >> > >> Ok. You are right. > >> Tensorflow is mentioned in docs: docs/_docs/setup.adoc. > >> > >> Adapters may require compilation time dependencies, but these > dependencies > >> shouldn't be part or release package, > >> regardless whether the ML module is a part of Ignite or extensions. > WDYT? > >> > >> On Thu, Aug 10, 2023 at 1:36 PM Ivan Daschinsky > >> wrote: > >> > >>> Actually, I haven't found any integration with tensorflow in AI code. > >>> Actually, all integrations are some adapters that allow to load > >> pretrained > >>> models (h2o, catboost etc.) > >>> > >>> чт, 10 авг. 2023 г. в 13:08, Ivan Daschinsky : > >>> > I am personally for moving to extensions. Alex has already mentioned > >> all > the reasons why it should be done and all of them are quite important. > The module seems to be quite independent and there is no problem to > >> move > it to ignite-extensions. > So I am +1 for moving to ignite-extensions. > > > чт, 10 авг. 2023 г. в 12:45, Kseniya Romanova >: > > >> > >> do you know anyone who uses it? > > > > I know some teams, who do. At the last Ignite Summit we had a talk > > featuring Ml module (from the Groovy community). > > Anyway, We need here the module maintainer opinion > > + Alex > > > > On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 3:38 PM Andrey Mashenkov < > > andrey.mashen...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > >> -1 for removal. > >> 0 for relocation > >> > >> imho, TC resources and module size aren't good arguments for > >> removal/moving. > >> ML tests could be run nightly. > >> ML module contains few integrations (with TensorFlow and other), > >> these > >> optional integrations are wighty and could be moved to extension, > >> but core functionality still can be left untouched if it is highly > > coupled > >> with core Ignite and moving to extension is hard. > >> > >> > >> On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 3:22 PM Anton Vinogradov > >>> wrote: > >> > >>> +1 to relocation > >>> > >>> On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 3:09 PM Alex Plehanov < > >>> plehanov.a...@gmail.com > >> > >>> wrote: > >>> > Pavel, do you know anyone who uses it? > > Looks like it isn't used at all (no questions on mail lists, no > tickets), but we spend developers time to build module with > >> every > Ignite rebuild, we spend users traffic to download module (ML > >> with > dependencies takes about 1/4 of our binary release package size) > >>> and > we spend
Re: Removal of ignite ml module (or moving it to extensions)
A few cents to let you know how abandoned ML module is. 1. Last valuable commit December 9, 2020 - https://github.com/apache/ignite/commit/04f6a33851d9f7bd269a09fdc2c74485b1e01a8a 2. Dependencies and current versions of them: * com.dropbox.core:dropbox-core-sdk:2.1.1 current version is - 5.4.5 [1] * com.github.fommil.netlib:core:1.1.2 - not developed and archived since 2017. Last version released in 2013 [2] * org.apache.commons:commons-rng-core:1.0 current version is 1.5 [3] * com.zaxxer:SparseBitSet:1.0 current version is 1.2 [4] * ai.catboost:catboost-prediction:0.24 current version is 1.2 [5] * ai.h2o:h2o-genmodel:3.26.0.8 current version is 3.42.0.2 [6] ML community make a huge step forward since 2020. So I doubt ML features and tools integrations works as expected nowadays. Those type of Ignite features(abandoned or supported partially) has to be in extensions. [1] https://github.com/dropbox/dropbox-sdk-java [2] https://github.com/fommil/netlib-java [3] https://commons.apache.org/proper/commons-rng/commons-rng-core/ [4] https://github.com/brettwooldridge/SparseBitSet [5] https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/ai.catboost/catboost-prediction [6] https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/ai.h2o/h2o-genmodel > 11 авг. 2023 г., в 12:19, Kseniya Romanova написал(а): > > As far as I know, the integration was removed from the Tensorflow side. > > On Thu, Aug 10, 2023 at 2:04 PM Andrey Mashenkov > wrote: > >> Ivan, >> >>> Actually, I haven't found any integration with tensorflow in AI code. >> >> Ok. You are right. >> Tensorflow is mentioned in docs: docs/_docs/setup.adoc. >> >> Adapters may require compilation time dependencies, but these dependencies >> shouldn't be part or release package, >> regardless whether the ML module is a part of Ignite or extensions. WDYT? >> >> On Thu, Aug 10, 2023 at 1:36 PM Ivan Daschinsky >> wrote: >> >>> Actually, I haven't found any integration with tensorflow in AI code. >>> Actually, all integrations are some adapters that allow to load >> pretrained >>> models (h2o, catboost etc.) >>> >>> чт, 10 авг. 2023 г. в 13:08, Ivan Daschinsky : >>> I am personally for moving to extensions. Alex has already mentioned >> all the reasons why it should be done and all of them are quite important. The module seems to be quite independent and there is no problem to >> move it to ignite-extensions. So I am +1 for moving to ignite-extensions. чт, 10 авг. 2023 г. в 12:45, Kseniya Romanova : >> >> do you know anyone who uses it? > > I know some teams, who do. At the last Ignite Summit we had a talk > featuring Ml module (from the Groovy community). > Anyway, We need here the module maintainer opinion > + Alex > > On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 3:38 PM Andrey Mashenkov < > andrey.mashen...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> -1 for removal. >> 0 for relocation >> >> imho, TC resources and module size aren't good arguments for >> removal/moving. >> ML tests could be run nightly. >> ML module contains few integrations (with TensorFlow and other), >> these >> optional integrations are wighty and could be moved to extension, >> but core functionality still can be left untouched if it is highly > coupled >> with core Ignite and moving to extension is hard. >> >> >> On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 3:22 PM Anton Vinogradov >>> wrote: >> >>> +1 to relocation >>> >>> On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 3:09 PM Alex Plehanov < >>> plehanov.a...@gmail.com >> >>> wrote: >>> Pavel, do you know anyone who uses it? Looks like it isn't used at all (no questions on mail lists, no tickets), but we spend developers time to build module with >> every Ignite rebuild, we spend users traffic to download module (ML >> with dependencies takes about 1/4 of our binary release package size) >>> and we spend team-city resources to test module. +1 for removing or moving to extensions. ср, 9 авг. 2023 г. в 14:19, Pavel Tupitsyn < >> ptupit...@apache.org : > > Does it have any outstanding issues? A stable and useful >> module >> should not > be removed just because it does not evolve. > > On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 1:46 PM Ivan Daschinsky < > ivanda...@apache.org >>> wrote: > >> Igniters, seems that this module is completely abandoned for > more >>> than 2 >> years. But it is enormous and it seems that nobody wants to >>> take >> care of >> it. I suggest just removing it or moving it to extensions >> (as >>> option). >> WDYT? >> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Best regards, >> Andrey V. Mashenkov >> > -- Sincerely yours, Ivan
Re: Removal of ignite ml module (or moving it to extensions)
As far as I know, the integration was removed from the Tensorflow side. On Thu, Aug 10, 2023 at 2:04 PM Andrey Mashenkov wrote: > Ivan, > > > Actually, I haven't found any integration with tensorflow in AI code. > > Ok. You are right. > Tensorflow is mentioned in docs: docs/_docs/setup.adoc. > > Adapters may require compilation time dependencies, but these dependencies > shouldn't be part or release package, > regardless whether the ML module is a part of Ignite or extensions. WDYT? > > On Thu, Aug 10, 2023 at 1:36 PM Ivan Daschinsky > wrote: > > > Actually, I haven't found any integration with tensorflow in AI code. > > Actually, all integrations are some adapters that allow to load > pretrained > > models (h2o, catboost etc.) > > > > чт, 10 авг. 2023 г. в 13:08, Ivan Daschinsky : > > > > > I am personally for moving to extensions. Alex has already mentioned > all > > > the reasons why it should be done and all of them are quite important. > > > The module seems to be quite independent and there is no problem to > move > > > it to ignite-extensions. > > > So I am +1 for moving to ignite-extensions. > > > > > > > > > чт, 10 авг. 2023 г. в 12:45, Kseniya Romanova : > > > > > >> > > > >> > do you know anyone who uses it? > > >> > > >> I know some teams, who do. At the last Ignite Summit we had a talk > > >> featuring Ml module (from the Groovy community). > > >> Anyway, We need here the module maintainer opinion > > >> + Alex > > >> > > >> On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 3:38 PM Andrey Mashenkov < > > >> andrey.mashen...@gmail.com> > > >> wrote: > > >> > > >> > -1 for removal. > > >> > 0 for relocation > > >> > > > >> > imho, TC resources and module size aren't good arguments for > > >> > removal/moving. > > >> > ML tests could be run nightly. > > >> > ML module contains few integrations (with TensorFlow and other), > these > > >> > optional integrations are wighty and could be moved to extension, > > >> > but core functionality still can be left untouched if it is highly > > >> coupled > > >> > with core Ignite and moving to extension is hard. > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 3:22 PM Anton Vinogradov > > wrote: > > >> > > > >> > > +1 to relocation > > >> > > > > >> > > On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 3:09 PM Alex Plehanov < > > plehanov.a...@gmail.com > > >> > > > >> > > wrote: > > >> > > > > >> > > > Pavel, do you know anyone who uses it? > > >> > > > > > >> > > > Looks like it isn't used at all (no questions on mail lists, no > > >> > > > tickets), but we spend developers time to build module with > every > > >> > > > Ignite rebuild, we spend users traffic to download module (ML > with > > >> > > > dependencies takes about 1/4 of our binary release package size) > > and > > >> > > > we spend team-city resources to test module. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > +1 for removing or moving to extensions. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > ср, 9 авг. 2023 г. в 14:19, Pavel Tupitsyn < > ptupit...@apache.org > > >: > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > Does it have any outstanding issues? A stable and useful > module > > >> > should > > >> > > > not > > >> > > > > be removed just because it does not evolve. > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 1:46 PM Ivan Daschinsky < > > >> ivanda...@apache.org > > >> > > > > >> > > > wrote: > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > Igniters, seems that this module is completely abandoned for > > >> more > > >> > > than > > >> > > > 2 > > >> > > > > > years. But it is enormous and it seems that nobody wants to > > take > > >> > care > > >> > > > of > > >> > > > > > it. I suggest just removing it or moving it to extensions > (as > > >> > > option). > > >> > > > > > WDYT? > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > -- > > >> > Best regards, > > >> > Andrey V. Mashenkov > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Sincerely yours, Ivan Daschinskiy > > > > > > > > > -- > > Sincerely yours, Ivan Daschinskiy > > > > > -- > Best regards, > Andrey V. Mashenkov >
Re: Removal of ignite ml module (or moving it to extensions)
Ivan, > Actually, I haven't found any integration with tensorflow in AI code. Ok. You are right. Tensorflow is mentioned in docs: docs/_docs/setup.adoc. Adapters may require compilation time dependencies, but these dependencies shouldn't be part or release package, regardless whether the ML module is a part of Ignite or extensions. WDYT? On Thu, Aug 10, 2023 at 1:36 PM Ivan Daschinsky wrote: > Actually, I haven't found any integration with tensorflow in AI code. > Actually, all integrations are some adapters that allow to load pretrained > models (h2o, catboost etc.) > > чт, 10 авг. 2023 г. в 13:08, Ivan Daschinsky : > > > I am personally for moving to extensions. Alex has already mentioned all > > the reasons why it should be done and all of them are quite important. > > The module seems to be quite independent and there is no problem to move > > it to ignite-extensions. > > So I am +1 for moving to ignite-extensions. > > > > > > чт, 10 авг. 2023 г. в 12:45, Kseniya Romanova : > > > >> > > >> > do you know anyone who uses it? > >> > >> I know some teams, who do. At the last Ignite Summit we had a talk > >> featuring Ml module (from the Groovy community). > >> Anyway, We need here the module maintainer opinion > >> + Alex > >> > >> On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 3:38 PM Andrey Mashenkov < > >> andrey.mashen...@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >> > >> > -1 for removal. > >> > 0 for relocation > >> > > >> > imho, TC resources and module size aren't good arguments for > >> > removal/moving. > >> > ML tests could be run nightly. > >> > ML module contains few integrations (with TensorFlow and other), these > >> > optional integrations are wighty and could be moved to extension, > >> > but core functionality still can be left untouched if it is highly > >> coupled > >> > with core Ignite and moving to extension is hard. > >> > > >> > > >> > On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 3:22 PM Anton Vinogradov > wrote: > >> > > >> > > +1 to relocation > >> > > > >> > > On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 3:09 PM Alex Plehanov < > plehanov.a...@gmail.com > >> > > >> > > wrote: > >> > > > >> > > > Pavel, do you know anyone who uses it? > >> > > > > >> > > > Looks like it isn't used at all (no questions on mail lists, no > >> > > > tickets), but we spend developers time to build module with every > >> > > > Ignite rebuild, we spend users traffic to download module (ML with > >> > > > dependencies takes about 1/4 of our binary release package size) > and > >> > > > we spend team-city resources to test module. > >> > > > > >> > > > +1 for removing or moving to extensions. > >> > > > > >> > > > ср, 9 авг. 2023 г. в 14:19, Pavel Tupitsyn >: > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Does it have any outstanding issues? A stable and useful module > >> > should > >> > > > not > >> > > > > be removed just because it does not evolve. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 1:46 PM Ivan Daschinsky < > >> ivanda...@apache.org > >> > > > >> > > > wrote: > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Igniters, seems that this module is completely abandoned for > >> more > >> > > than > >> > > > 2 > >> > > > > > years. But it is enormous and it seems that nobody wants to > take > >> > care > >> > > > of > >> > > > > > it. I suggest just removing it or moving it to extensions (as > >> > > option). > >> > > > > > WDYT? > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > -- > >> > Best regards, > >> > Andrey V. Mashenkov > >> > > >> > > > > > > -- > > Sincerely yours, Ivan Daschinskiy > > > > > -- > Sincerely yours, Ivan Daschinskiy > -- Best regards, Andrey V. Mashenkov
Re: Removal of ignite ml module (or moving it to extensions)
Actually, I haven't found any integration with tensorflow in AI code. Actually, all integrations are some adapters that allow to load pretrained models (h2o, catboost etc.) чт, 10 авг. 2023 г. в 13:08, Ivan Daschinsky : > I am personally for moving to extensions. Alex has already mentioned all > the reasons why it should be done and all of them are quite important. > The module seems to be quite independent and there is no problem to move > it to ignite-extensions. > So I am +1 for moving to ignite-extensions. > > > чт, 10 авг. 2023 г. в 12:45, Kseniya Romanova : > >> > >> > do you know anyone who uses it? >> >> I know some teams, who do. At the last Ignite Summit we had a talk >> featuring Ml module (from the Groovy community). >> Anyway, We need here the module maintainer opinion >> + Alex >> >> On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 3:38 PM Andrey Mashenkov < >> andrey.mashen...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> > -1 for removal. >> > 0 for relocation >> > >> > imho, TC resources and module size aren't good arguments for >> > removal/moving. >> > ML tests could be run nightly. >> > ML module contains few integrations (with TensorFlow and other), these >> > optional integrations are wighty and could be moved to extension, >> > but core functionality still can be left untouched if it is highly >> coupled >> > with core Ignite and moving to extension is hard. >> > >> > >> > On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 3:22 PM Anton Vinogradov wrote: >> > >> > > +1 to relocation >> > > >> > > On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 3:09 PM Alex Plehanov > > >> > > wrote: >> > > >> > > > Pavel, do you know anyone who uses it? >> > > > >> > > > Looks like it isn't used at all (no questions on mail lists, no >> > > > tickets), but we spend developers time to build module with every >> > > > Ignite rebuild, we spend users traffic to download module (ML with >> > > > dependencies takes about 1/4 of our binary release package size) and >> > > > we spend team-city resources to test module. >> > > > >> > > > +1 for removing or moving to extensions. >> > > > >> > > > ср, 9 авг. 2023 г. в 14:19, Pavel Tupitsyn : >> > > > > >> > > > > Does it have any outstanding issues? A stable and useful module >> > should >> > > > not >> > > > > be removed just because it does not evolve. >> > > > > >> > > > > On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 1:46 PM Ivan Daschinsky < >> ivanda...@apache.org >> > > >> > > > wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > > > Igniters, seems that this module is completely abandoned for >> more >> > > than >> > > > 2 >> > > > > > years. But it is enormous and it seems that nobody wants to take >> > care >> > > > of >> > > > > > it. I suggest just removing it or moving it to extensions (as >> > > option). >> > > > > > WDYT? >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Best regards, >> > Andrey V. Mashenkov >> > >> > > > -- > Sincerely yours, Ivan Daschinskiy > -- Sincerely yours, Ivan Daschinskiy
Re: Removal of ignite ml module (or moving it to extensions)
I am personally for moving to extensions. Alex has already mentioned all the reasons why it should be done and all of them are quite important. The module seems to be quite independent and there is no problem to move it to ignite-extensions. So I am +1 for moving to ignite-extensions. чт, 10 авг. 2023 г. в 12:45, Kseniya Romanova : > > > > do you know anyone who uses it? > > I know some teams, who do. At the last Ignite Summit we had a talk > featuring Ml module (from the Groovy community). > Anyway, We need here the module maintainer opinion > + Alex > > On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 3:38 PM Andrey Mashenkov < > andrey.mashen...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > -1 for removal. > > 0 for relocation > > > > imho, TC resources and module size aren't good arguments for > > removal/moving. > > ML tests could be run nightly. > > ML module contains few integrations (with TensorFlow and other), these > > optional integrations are wighty and could be moved to extension, > > but core functionality still can be left untouched if it is highly > coupled > > with core Ignite and moving to extension is hard. > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 3:22 PM Anton Vinogradov wrote: > > > > > +1 to relocation > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 3:09 PM Alex Plehanov > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Pavel, do you know anyone who uses it? > > > > > > > > Looks like it isn't used at all (no questions on mail lists, no > > > > tickets), but we spend developers time to build module with every > > > > Ignite rebuild, we spend users traffic to download module (ML with > > > > dependencies takes about 1/4 of our binary release package size) and > > > > we spend team-city resources to test module. > > > > > > > > +1 for removing or moving to extensions. > > > > > > > > ср, 9 авг. 2023 г. в 14:19, Pavel Tupitsyn : > > > > > > > > > > Does it have any outstanding issues? A stable and useful module > > should > > > > not > > > > > be removed just because it does not evolve. > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 1:46 PM Ivan Daschinsky < > ivanda...@apache.org > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Igniters, seems that this module is completely abandoned for more > > > than > > > > 2 > > > > > > years. But it is enormous and it seems that nobody wants to take > > care > > > > of > > > > > > it. I suggest just removing it or moving it to extensions (as > > > option). > > > > > > WDYT? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Best regards, > > Andrey V. Mashenkov > > > -- Sincerely yours, Ivan Daschinskiy
Re: Removal of ignite ml module (or moving it to extensions)
> > do you know anyone who uses it? I know some teams, who do. At the last Ignite Summit we had a talk featuring Ml module (from the Groovy community). Anyway, We need here the module maintainer opinion + Alex On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 3:38 PM Andrey Mashenkov wrote: > -1 for removal. > 0 for relocation > > imho, TC resources and module size aren't good arguments for > removal/moving. > ML tests could be run nightly. > ML module contains few integrations (with TensorFlow and other), these > optional integrations are wighty and could be moved to extension, > but core functionality still can be left untouched if it is highly coupled > with core Ignite and moving to extension is hard. > > > On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 3:22 PM Anton Vinogradov wrote: > > > +1 to relocation > > > > On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 3:09 PM Alex Plehanov > > wrote: > > > > > Pavel, do you know anyone who uses it? > > > > > > Looks like it isn't used at all (no questions on mail lists, no > > > tickets), but we spend developers time to build module with every > > > Ignite rebuild, we spend users traffic to download module (ML with > > > dependencies takes about 1/4 of our binary release package size) and > > > we spend team-city resources to test module. > > > > > > +1 for removing or moving to extensions. > > > > > > ср, 9 авг. 2023 г. в 14:19, Pavel Tupitsyn : > > > > > > > > Does it have any outstanding issues? A stable and useful module > should > > > not > > > > be removed just because it does not evolve. > > > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 1:46 PM Ivan Daschinsky > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Igniters, seems that this module is completely abandoned for more > > than > > > 2 > > > > > years. But it is enormous and it seems that nobody wants to take > care > > > of > > > > > it. I suggest just removing it or moving it to extensions (as > > option). > > > > > WDYT? > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Best regards, > Andrey V. Mashenkov >
Re: Removal of ignite ml module (or moving it to extensions)
-1 for removal. 0 for relocation imho, TC resources and module size aren't good arguments for removal/moving. ML tests could be run nightly. ML module contains few integrations (with TensorFlow and other), these optional integrations are wighty and could be moved to extension, but core functionality still can be left untouched if it is highly coupled with core Ignite and moving to extension is hard. On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 3:22 PM Anton Vinogradov wrote: > +1 to relocation > > On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 3:09 PM Alex Plehanov > wrote: > > > Pavel, do you know anyone who uses it? > > > > Looks like it isn't used at all (no questions on mail lists, no > > tickets), but we spend developers time to build module with every > > Ignite rebuild, we spend users traffic to download module (ML with > > dependencies takes about 1/4 of our binary release package size) and > > we spend team-city resources to test module. > > > > +1 for removing or moving to extensions. > > > > ср, 9 авг. 2023 г. в 14:19, Pavel Tupitsyn : > > > > > > Does it have any outstanding issues? A stable and useful module should > > not > > > be removed just because it does not evolve. > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 1:46 PM Ivan Daschinsky > > wrote: > > > > > > > Igniters, seems that this module is completely abandoned for more > than > > 2 > > > > years. But it is enormous and it seems that nobody wants to take care > > of > > > > it. I suggest just removing it or moving it to extensions (as > option). > > > > WDYT? > > > > > > > -- Best regards, Andrey V. Mashenkov
Re: Removal of ignite ml module (or moving it to extensions)
+1 to relocation On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 3:09 PM Alex Plehanov wrote: > Pavel, do you know anyone who uses it? > > Looks like it isn't used at all (no questions on mail lists, no > tickets), but we spend developers time to build module with every > Ignite rebuild, we spend users traffic to download module (ML with > dependencies takes about 1/4 of our binary release package size) and > we spend team-city resources to test module. > > +1 for removing or moving to extensions. > > ср, 9 авг. 2023 г. в 14:19, Pavel Tupitsyn : > > > > Does it have any outstanding issues? A stable and useful module should > not > > be removed just because it does not evolve. > > > > On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 1:46 PM Ivan Daschinsky > wrote: > > > > > Igniters, seems that this module is completely abandoned for more than > 2 > > > years. But it is enormous and it seems that nobody wants to take care > of > > > it. I suggest just removing it or moving it to extensions (as option). > > > WDYT? > > > >
Re: Removal of ignite ml module (or moving it to extensions)
Pavel, do you know anyone who uses it? Looks like it isn't used at all (no questions on mail lists, no tickets), but we spend developers time to build module with every Ignite rebuild, we spend users traffic to download module (ML with dependencies takes about 1/4 of our binary release package size) and we spend team-city resources to test module. +1 for removing or moving to extensions. ср, 9 авг. 2023 г. в 14:19, Pavel Tupitsyn : > > Does it have any outstanding issues? A stable and useful module should not > be removed just because it does not evolve. > > On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 1:46 PM Ivan Daschinsky wrote: > > > Igniters, seems that this module is completely abandoned for more than 2 > > years. But it is enormous and it seems that nobody wants to take care of > > it. I suggest just removing it or moving it to extensions (as option). > > WDYT? > >
Re: Removal of ignite ml module (or moving it to extensions)
Hello, Pavel. I think the ignite-extension project is right place for ignite-ml. Useful module that has its own release cycle and don’t contains core Ignite features has to be inside extensions. > 9 авг. 2023 г., в 14:18, Pavel Tupitsyn написал(а): > > Does it have any outstanding issues? A stable and useful module should not > be removed just because it does not evolve. > > On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 1:46 PM Ivan Daschinsky wrote: > >> Igniters, seems that this module is completely abandoned for more than 2 >> years. But it is enormous and it seems that nobody wants to take care of >> it. I suggest just removing it or moving it to extensions (as option). >> WDYT? >>
Re: Removal of ignite ml module (or moving it to extensions)
Does it have any outstanding issues? A stable and useful module should not be removed just because it does not evolve. On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 1:46 PM Ivan Daschinsky wrote: > Igniters, seems that this module is completely abandoned for more than 2 > years. But it is enormous and it seems that nobody wants to take care of > it. I suggest just removing it or moving it to extensions (as option). > WDYT? >
Removal of ignite ml module (or moving it to extensions)
Igniters, seems that this module is completely abandoned for more than 2 years. But it is enormous and it seems that nobody wants to take care of it. I suggest just removing it or moving it to extensions (as option). WDYT?
