-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 674
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[BUG] Resource overrides doesn't works if the task is not defined in the same workflow file. #4957
Comments
🤖 Hey @xshen8888, nice to see you around here again! 🚀 Based on the information you've provided, it seems like the resource override might not be working when the task is moved to a different package because the Here is the relevant code from the flyteadmin/pkg/manager/impl/util/resources.go file: request := interfaces.ResourceRequest{
ResourceType: admin.MatchableResource_TASK_RESOURCE,
}
if id != nil && len(id.Project) > 0 {
request.Project = id.Project
}
if id != nil && len(id.Domain) > 0 {
request.Domain = id.Domain
}
if id != nil && id.ResourceType == core.ResourceType_WORKFLOW && len(id.Name) > 0 {
request.Workflow = id.Name
}
resource, err := resourceManager.GetResource(ctx, request) In this code, the As for the If you are looking for information specifically about Sources
|
Hi @pingsutw , |
#take |
Doing it |
Hi @Future-Outlier , @arbaobao , @dosu-bot, |
@xshen8888 , can you double-check if you're not being hit by the issue described in flyteorg/flytekit#2151? |
Describe the bug
Resource overrides works if the task foo() is defined in the same workflow file.
However, if I move the task foo() to another package (so that it’s shared and re-usable task), with_overrides() like below will not be effective.
Do you experience this, and what is the solution?
In another workflow file a.py:
Result:
Task foo has been allocated resources cpu 3 & member 3Gi.
Expected behavior
Task foo should have been allocated resources cpu 5 & member 5Gi.
Additional context to reproduce
No response
Screenshots
No response
Are you sure this issue hasn't been raised already?
Have you read the Code of Conduct?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: