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

Release 0.8.1rc1 #814

Closed
wants to merge 8 commits into from
Closed

Release 0.8.1rc1 #814

wants to merge 8 commits into from

Conversation

basetenbot
Copy link
Collaborator

Updating Truss from "0.7.23" to 0.8.1rc1. PLEASE ENSURE YOU MERGE, NOT SQUASH

bolasim and others added 8 commits January 31, 2024 01:36
* Allow specifying requirements via requirements.txt file

* Update truss/truss_config.py

Co-authored-by: helenlyang <helen.yang@baseten.co>

* Update truss/tests/test_model_inference.py

Co-authored-by: helenlyang <helen.yang@baseten.co>

* Review comments and docs

---------

Co-authored-by: helenlyang <helen.yang@baseten.co>
* prints have been intercepted!

* clean up

* fix streams

* fix typo

* test added

* minor fixes
* prints have been intercepted!

* clean up

* fix streams

* fix typo

* test added

* minor fixes

* add assert fix
With this PR, we no longer spawn a background thread for detecting changes and creating patches. This should 
mitigate the issue where another thread unnecessarily consumes CPU cycles and slows down truss watch.

In addition to the speedups, removing TrussFileSyncer involved changing the logger used in BasetenRemote.patch. This 
fixes a bug that resulted in the info logs in BasetenRemote.patch not being logged.
Some easy improvements to `truss watch` CLI logs:
* Most logs are printed instead of using `logger`. There's no need to expose which module is logging to the user
* Color codes logs
* Adds an `Applying patch...` spinner before the patch request is sent to server. Waiting on a response from the server 
after sending the patch request is the lengthiest part of the patching process, so I think this additional bit of feedback 
would be useful to the user
@bolasim
Copy link
Collaborator

bolasim commented Feb 1, 2024

Instead of merging this. I'm just gonna run the action on this branch.

@squidarth
Copy link
Collaborator

Instead of merging this. I'm just gonna run the action on this branch.

which action?

@bolasim
Copy link
Collaborator

bolasim commented Feb 1, 2024

@helenlyang
Copy link
Contributor

Going to close this PR in favor of #813. I just tested @bolasim's requirements change with the context builder image here and it looks good, will post more details in the other PR

@helenlyang helenlyang closed this Feb 1, 2024
@helenlyang helenlyang mentioned this pull request Feb 1, 2024
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.

5 participants