Skip to content
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

build: setup ML workspace and VM cluster provisioning via bicep scripts #43

Open
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

anujsinha3
Copy link
Collaborator

@anujsinha3 anujsinha3 commented Feb 22, 2024

Change Description

#21 Configuring bicep script for auto-provision of MLWorkspace and VMCluster

  • My PR includes a link to the issue that I am addressing

Solution Description

Code Quality

  • I have read the Contribution Guide
  • My code follows the code style of this project
  • My code builds (or compiles) cleanly without any errors or warnings
  • My code contains relevant comments and necessary documentation

Project-Specific Pull Request Checklists

Bug Fix Checklist

  • My fix includes a new test that breaks as a result of the bug (if possible)
  • My change includes a breaking change
    • My change includes backwards compatibility and deprecation warnings (if possible)

New Feature Checklist

  • I have added or updated the docstrings associated with my feature using the NumPy docstring format
  • I have updated the tutorial to highlight my new feature (if appropriate)
  • I have added unit/End-to-End (E2E) test cases to cover my new feature
  • My change includes a breaking change
    • My change includes backwards compatibility and deprecation warnings (if possible)

Documentation Change Checklist

Build/CI Change Checklist

  • If required or optional dependencies have changed (including version numbers), I have updated the README to reflect this
  • If this is a new CI setup, I have added the associated badge to the README

Other Change Checklist

  • Any new or updated docstrings use the NumPy docstring format.
  • I have updated the tutorial to highlight my new feature (if appropriate)
  • I have added unit/End-to-End (E2E) test cases to cover any changes
  • My change includes a breaking change
    • My change includes backwards compatibility and deprecation warnings (if possible)

@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Feb 22, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 98.63%. Comparing base (daf1b1c) to head (bc1768b).

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main      #43   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   98.63%   98.63%           
=======================================
  Files           8        8           
  Lines         292      292           
=======================================
  Hits          288      288           
  Misses          4        4           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

Copy link
Collaborator

@carlosgjs carlosgjs left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looking good! Can you add a README.md that explains how to run this including what tools might be needed?


@description('The minimum number of nodes to use on the cluster. If not specified, defaults to 0')
param minNodeCount int = 0
@description(' The maximum number of nodes to use on the cluster. If not specified, defaults to 4.')
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The comment says zero, but the default is 1?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The cluster does get provisioned with a minimum of 0 nodes. If I remember correctly, the cluster we had also had 0 as its minimum nodes.

@anujsinha3 anujsinha3 marked this pull request as ready for review February 27, 2024 09:35
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants