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

Disabling local feature importance view for large data scenario #1828

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Dec 6, 2022

Conversation

gaugup
Copy link
Contributor

@gaugup gaugup commented Dec 3, 2022

Description

The table view is not in scope for large data effort. Hence disabling the local importance tab for large data scenario.

image

Checklist

  • I have added screenshots above for all UI changes.
  • I have added e2e tests for all UI changes.
  • Documentation was updated if it was needed.

@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Dec 3, 2022

Codecov Report

Merging #1828 (1528d0a) into main (5e69474) will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #1828   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   87.33%   87.33%           
=======================================
  Files          39       39           
  Lines        1792     1792           
=======================================
  Hits         1565     1565           
  Misses        227      227           
Flag Coverage Δ
unittests 87.33% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

@gaugup gaugup enabled auto-merge (squash) December 5, 2022 21:58
@gaugup gaugup merged commit 752c2d0 into main Dec 6, 2022
@gaugup gaugup deleted the gaugup/DisableLocalFeatureImportanceLargeData branch December 6, 2022 00:04
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.

4 participants