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

Add "datastores" to represent input data from zarr, npy, etc #66

Merged
merged 358 commits into from
Nov 21, 2024

Conversation

leifdenby
Copy link
Member

@leifdenby leifdenby commented Jul 17, 2024

Describe your changes

This PR builds on #54 (which introduces zarr-based training data) by splitting the Config-class introduced in #54 to separately represent the configuration for what data to load from the functions to load data (the latter is what I call a "datastore"). In doing this I have also introduced a general interface through an abstract base class BaseDatastore with a set of functions that are called in the rest of neural-lam which provide data for training/validation/test and information about this data (see #58 for my overview of the methods that #54 uses to load data).

The motivation for this work is to allow for a clear separation between how data is loaded into neural-lam and how training/validation/test samples are created from that data. Creating the interface between these two steps makes it clear what is expected to be provided when people want to add new data-sources to neural-lam

In the text below I am trying to use the same nomenclature that @sadamov introduced, namely:

  • data "category": relates to whether a multidimensional array represents state, forcing or static data.
  • data "transformation": this refers to the operations of the extracting of specific variables from source datasets (e.g. zarr datasets), flattening spatial coordinates into a grid_index coordinate, levels and variables into a {category}_feature coordinate (i.e. these are operations that
BaseDatastore-derived classes WeatherDataset
returns only python primitive types, np.ndarray and xr.Dataset/xr.DataArray objects torch.Tensor objects
provides transformed train/test/val datasets that cover the entire time and space range for a given category of data individual time samples (including windowing and handling both analysis and forecasts) for train/test/val, optionally sample from ensemble members

To support both the multizar config format that @sadamov introduced in #54, the old npyfiles and also data transformed with mllam-data-prep I have currently implemented the following three datastore classes:

  • neural_lam.datastore.NpyDataStore: reads data from .npy-files in the format introduced in neural-lam v0.1.0 - this uses dask.delayed so no array content is read until it is used
  • neural_lam.datastore.MultizarrDatastore: can combines multiple zarr files during train/val/test sampling, with the transformations to facilitate this implemented within neural_lam.datastore.MultizarrDatastore. - removed as we decided MDPDatastore was enough
  • neural_lam.datastore.MDPDatastore: can combine multiple zarr datasets either either as a preprocessing step or during sampling, but offloads the implementation of the transformations the mllam-data-prep package.

Each of the these inherit from BaseCartesianDatastore which itself inherits from BaseDatastore. I have added this last layer of indirection to make it easier for non-gridded data to be used in neural-lam in future.

Testing:

Caveats:

  • storage of graphs and other auxiliary information: Reading @sadamov's Multiple Zarr to Rule them All #54 I got the feeling that the intention was that the path for a config-file for where data is coming from is in effect the directory for a dataset. It make sense to me to put everything relative the the parent directory of this config file, at least it as an easy thing to simply use. By placing the configuration file externally to the neural-lam repository (by making neural-lam a package Refactor codebase into a python package #32) I think this is necessary and less arbitrary that saying everything has to be in a "data" directory. For this reason I have assumed that any paths in the mllam and multizarr configs that don't start with a protocol or are an absolute path, that these paths are relative to the parent path of the config. For example multizarr's "create_forcing" cli interface defines a path, but so does the config so that was inconsistent and errorprone I think.
  • I have renamed the coordinate you introduced @sadamov from grid to grid_index. I think it ambiguous what "grid" refers to since that could be the grid itself, as well as the grid-index as it was used.
  • We shouldn’t use .variable as a variable name for a an xr.DataArray because xr.DataArray.variable is a reserved attribute for data-arrays
  • I think the comment # target_states: (ar_steps-2, N_grid, d_features) in WeatherDataset.getitem is incorrect @sadamov, or at least my understand of what ar_steps represents is different. I expect the target states to have exactly ar_steps in them, rather than ar_steps-2. Or said another way, would otherwise happen if ar_steps == 0?

Things I am unsure about:

On whether something should be in BaseDatastore vs WeatherDataset:

  • I have moved “apply_windowing” to WeatherDataset because it doesn’t apply to “state” category for example

Type of change

  • 🐛 Bug fix (non-breaking change that fixes an issue)
  • ✨ New feature (non-breaking change that adds functionality)
  • 💥 Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
  • 📖 Documentation (Addition or improvements to documentation)

Checklist before requesting a review

  • My branch is up-to-date with the target branch - if not update your fork with the changes from the target branch (use pull with --rebase option if possible).
  • I have performed a self-review of my code
  • For any new/modified functions/classes I have added docstrings that clearly describe its purpose, expected inputs and returned values
  • I have placed in-line comments to clarify the intent of any hard-to-understand passages of my code
  • I have updated the README to cover introduced code changes
  • I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
  • I have given the PR a name that clearly describes the change, written in imperative form (context).
  • I have requested a reviewer and an assignee (assignee is responsible for merging)

Checklist for reviewers

Each PR comes with its own improvements and flaws. The reviewer should check the following:

  • the code is readable
  • the code is well tested
  • the code is documented (including return types and parameters)
  • the code is easy to maintain

Author checklist after completed review

  • I have added a line to the CHANGELOG describing this change, in a section
    reflecting type of change (add section where missing):
    • added: when you have added new functionality
    • changed: when default behaviour of the code has been changed
    • fixes: when your contribution fixes a bug

Checklist for assignee

  • PR is up to date with the base branch
  • the tests pass
  • author has added an entry to the changelog (and designated the change as added, changed or fixed)
  • Once the PR is ready to be merged, squash commits and merge the PR.

@sadamov
Copy link
Collaborator

sadamov commented Nov 16, 2024

Okay the remaining bug in neural_lam.datastore.npyfilesmeps.compute_standardization_stats was related to the number of workers defined in the WeatherDataset. Setting num_workers=0 solves the problem of infinite waiting time before the one-step differences are calculated. I assume this is related to a low number of samples in the example datasets we are using in the tests. And the way multiprocessing jobs are spawned when num_workers>0 (see line 617ff in weather_dataset.py). I have now run all test locally on a machine with 2 cuda devices and can happily report that ALL tests pass ✔️✔️✔️✔️✔️✔️✔️✔️✔️✔️✔️✔️✔️✔️✔️✔️✔️✔️

image

joeloskarsson and others added 6 commits November 18, 2024 10:57
commit 2cc617e
Author: Joel Oskarsson <joel.oskarsson@liu.se>
Date:   Mon Nov 18 08:35:03 2024 +0100

    Add weights_only=True to all torch.load calls (mllam#86)

    ## Describe your changes

    Currently running neural-lam with the latest version of pytorch gives a
    warning:

    ```
    FutureWarning: You are using torch.load with weights_only=False (the current default value), which uses the default pickle module implicitly. It is possible to construct malicious pickle data which will execute arbitrary code during unpickling (See https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/blob/main/SECURITY.md#untrusted-models  for more details). In a future release, the default value for weights_only will be flipped to True. This limits the functions that could be executed during unpickling. Arbitrary objects will no longer be allowed to be loaded via this mode unless they are explicitly allowlisted by the user via torch.serialization.add_safe_globals. We recommend you start setting weights_only=True for any use case where you don't have full control of the loaded file. Please open an issue on GitHub for any issues related to this experimental feature.
    ```

    As we only use `torch.load` to load tensors and lists, we can just set
    `weights_only=True` and get rid of this warning (and increase security I
    suppose).

    ## Issue Link
    None

    ## Type of change

    - [x] 🐛 Bug fix (non-breaking change that fixes an issue)
    - [ ] ✨ New feature (non-breaking change that adds functionality)
    - [ ] 💥 Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing
    functionality to not work as expected)
    - [ ] 📖 Documentation (Addition or improvements to documentation)

    ## Checklist before requesting a review

    - [x] My branch is up-to-date with the target branch - if not update
    your fork with the changes from the target branch (use `pull` with
    `--rebase` option if possible).
    - [x] I have performed a self-review of my code
    - [x] For any new/modified functions/classes I have added docstrings
    that clearly describe its purpose, expected inputs and returned values
    - [x] I have placed in-line comments to clarify the intent of any
    hard-to-understand passages of my code
    - [x] I have updated the [README](README.MD) to cover introduced code
    changes
    - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my
    feature works
    - [x] I have given the PR a name that clearly describes the change,
    written in imperative form
    ([context](https://www.gitkraken.com/learn/git/best-practices/git-commit-message#using-imperative-verb-form)).
    - [x] I have requested a reviewer and an assignee (assignee is
    responsible for merging). This applies only if you have write access to
    the repo, otherwise feel free to tag a maintainer to add a reviewer and
    assignee.

    ## Checklist for reviewers

    Each PR comes with its own improvements and flaws. The reviewer should
    check the following:
    - [x] the code is readable
    - [ ] the code is well tested
    - [x] the code is documented (including return types and parameters)
    - [x] the code is easy to maintain

    ## Author checklist after completed review

    - [ ] I have added a line to the CHANGELOG describing this change, in a
    section
      reflecting type of change (add section where missing):
      - *added*: when you have added new functionality
      - *changed*: when default behaviour of the code has been changed
      - *fixes*: when your contribution fixes a bug

    ## Checklist for assignee

    - [ ] PR is up to date with the base branch
    - [ ] the tests pass
    - [ ] author has added an entry to the changelog (and designated the
    change as *added*, *changed* or *fixed*)
    - Once the PR is ready to be merged, squash commits and merge the PR.
@joeloskarsson
Copy link
Collaborator

Do we know exactly why the tests are not passing here? From the comments above I thought @sadamov fixes made all tests pass, but they still look red here on GH. Maybe I have missed something? Looking at the logs I see some "Process completed with exit code 137.", which would be running out of memory. Is that the issue?

@sadamov
Copy link
Collaborator

sadamov commented Nov 19, 2024

Do we know exactly why the tests are not passing here? From the comments above I thought @sadamov fixes made all tests pass, but they still look red here on GH. Maybe I have missed something? Looking at the logs I see some "Process completed with exit code 137.", which would be running out of memory. Is that the issue?

I just remembered that I had to locally fix MDP: https://github.com/mllam/mllam-data-prep/blob/8e7a5bc63a1ae1235b82b1f702c00eb33e891a79/mllam_data_prep/config.py#L306

where I added this line: 307: extra: Optional[Dict[str, Any]] = None

@leifdenby when will you release v0.3.0 of MDP, I think these issues will be fixed there?

I don't know about the memory issue, but I cannot run the test_training.py on my local machine with 16GB of RAM because of memory. Maybe the github runner also runs out of memory?

@joeloskarsson
Copy link
Collaborator

joeloskarsson commented Nov 19, 2024

The tests not passing partially relate to MDP, but there seems to also be an OOM issue. Will investigate.

@joeloskarsson
Copy link
Collaborator

And we're green again 🟢 🥳

Copy link
Collaborator

@joeloskarsson joeloskarsson left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Alright, this is pretty much good to go now! Only waiting for the MDP compatability to hit merge. I am happy with everything else.

pyproject.toml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@leifdenby
Copy link
Member Author

And we're green again 🟢 🥳

OMG! That makes me happy. With tests running on CPU and GPU. AMAZIN!

Ok, the good news is @observingClouds and I have decided how to add the projection info to the datastore config. We are going to go with the approach I already implemented where we use this extras section of the config that mllam-data-prep ignores (this is because it turns out it is not currently possible to define projection info with a WKT-string and from that create a cartopy.crs.Projection that can be used for plotting, mllam/mllam-data-prep#33 (comment)). I still need to fix the example to set the projection info correctly (which is about also setting the globe radius, mllam/mllam-data-prep#18 (comment)). Once I have complete that and @observingClouds has reviewed it we will release v0.5.0 and this PR can be merged 🥳

Copy link
Collaborator

@joeloskarsson joeloskarsson left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Since I am off for a few days I'm gonna change to approve here, so you can go ahead and hit merge on this once #66 (comment) is sorted.

@leifdenby
Copy link
Member Author

Ok, this is the big moment! All the tests have passed and approvals from both @joeloskarsson and @sadamov! Finally merging after 4 months of work! 🥳 I am merging! 🚀

@leifdenby leifdenby merged commit c3c1722 into mllam:main Nov 21, 2024
8 checks passed
@sadamov
Copy link
Collaborator

sadamov commented Nov 21, 2024

@leifdenby This is just awesome! So happy with the result. You really introduced a very nice and clean structure to the data-pipeline. Biggest PR of my life, I learned a lot about Python-classes along the way and thouroughly enjoyed working with all of you here on this PR ❤️

leifdenby added a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 4, 2024
Fix bugs in recently introduced datastore functionality #66 (error in
calculation in `BaseDatastore.get_xy_extent()` and overlooked in-place
modification of config dict in `MDPDatastore.coords_projection`), and
also fix issue in `ARModel.plot_examples` by using newly introduced
(#66) `WeatherDataset.create_dataarray_from_tensor()` to create
`xr.DataArray` from prediction tensor and calling plot methods directly
on `xr.DataArray` rather than using bare numpy arrays with `matplotlib`.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
7 participants