Skip to content

[Breaking] Change bytestream to array-based config #1848

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

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

amankrx
Copy link
Collaborator

@amankrx amankrx commented Jul 3, 2025

This is a continuation of the previously opened PR to change the bytestream to array-based config.
In contrast to #1712, there's no backwards-compatibility layer.

Note: I didn't had the write access so opening a new PR.

Closes #1649

Description

Please include a summary of the changes and the related issue. Please also
include relevant motivation and context.

Fixes # (issue)

Type of change

Please delete options that aren't relevant.

  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to
    not work as expected)
  • This change requires a documentation update

How Has This Been Tested?

Please also list any relevant details for your test configuration

Checklist

  • Updated documentation if needed
  • Tests added/amended
  • bazel test //... passes locally
  • PR is contained in a single commit, using git amend see some docs

This change is Reviewable

Co-authored by @jaroeichler

@amankrx amankrx force-pushed the bytestream-config branch from ec97b4d to 4804332 Compare July 3, 2025 10:26
@amankrx amankrx force-pushed the bytestream-config branch from 4804332 to 9b15eb4 Compare July 3, 2025 10:40
@amankrx amankrx force-pushed the bytestream-config branch from 9b15eb4 to 9254721 Compare July 3, 2025 10:46
@MarcusSorealheis
Copy link
Collaborator

MarcusSorealheis commented Jul 3, 2025

Please just resolve the conflicts in the original PR.

Copy link
Member

@palfrey palfrey left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The previous PR didn't have it, but I think we should have the backwards compatibility in there

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Changes here should be reverted

_timeout_streaam_drop_guard: spawn!("bytestream_idle_stream_timeout", async move {
(*sleep_fn)().await;
_timeout_stream_drop_guard: spawn!("bytestream_idle_stream_timeout", async move {
sleep(timeout).await;
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Why the change? Doesn't feel related to the other bytestream work?

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I agree


let store_config = self
.get_store_config(instance_name)
.err_tip(|| format!("'instance_name' not configured for '{instance_name}'"))?;
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

get_store_config already does this error


let store_config = self
.get_store_config(&instance_name)
.err_tip(|| format!("'instance_name' not configured for '{instance_name}'"))?;
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

get_store_config already does this error

@@ -42,7 +39,7 @@ memory and filesystem stores instead of S3 and Redis.
"temp_path": "/tmp/nativelink/data-worker-test/tmp_path-cas",
"eviction_policy": {
// 10gb.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Comment can go away now it's written out

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

agree

},
"OSFamily": {
"values": [""]
},
"container-image": {
"values": [""]
},
// Example of how to set which docker images are available and set
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Why the large docs changes?

@amankrx amankrx force-pushed the bytestream-config branch from 1fb3bcc to 40bd484 Compare July 11, 2025 12:32
In contrast to TraceMachina#1712, there's no backwards-compatibility layer.

Closes TraceMachina#1649

Fix the merge conflicts for the Bytestream config JSON file
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.

Rework the instance_name config api
3 participants