Skip to content

[feature] Reintroduce add_resource_limit to kfp v2 SDK or another resource requests/limits mechanism #10996

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
dariuszg-gc opened this issue Jul 10, 2024 · 9 comments

Comments

@dariuszg-gc
Copy link

dariuszg-gc commented Jul 10, 2024

Feature Area

/area sdk

What feature would you like to see?

Reintroduction of add_resource_limit and add_resource_request from v1 to v2 SDK.

def add_resource_limit(self, resource_name, value) -> 'Container':

def add_resource_request(self, resource_name, value) -> 'Container':

OR another mechanism to allow flexible specification of multiple resource requests/limits

What is the use case or pain point?

Currently the only mechanism to achieve setting resource limit is available via the set_accelerator_type and set_accelerator_limit methods (with intention to use it for GPU/TPU devices), however it allows to specify them only for a singular resource.

There are several use cases that require usage of multiple DevicePlugin/DRA managed devices (e.g GPU + RDMA RNIC), thus the need for a mechanism that allows adding multiple resource limits/requests to the pod spec.

Is there a workaround currently?

None (v2) or use of deprecated version.


Love this idea? Give it a 👍.

Copy link

github-actions bot commented Sep 9, 2024

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the lifecycle/stale The issue / pull request is stale, any activities remove this label. label Sep 9, 2024
@dariuszg-gc
Copy link
Author

/remove-lifecycle stale

@google-oss-prow google-oss-prow bot removed the lifecycle/stale The issue / pull request is stale, any activities remove this label. label Sep 16, 2024
Copy link

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the lifecycle/stale The issue / pull request is stale, any activities remove this label. label Nov 16, 2024
@dariuszg-gc
Copy link
Author

/remove-lifecycle stale

@google-oss-prow google-oss-prow bot removed the lifecycle/stale The issue / pull request is stale, any activities remove this label. label Nov 18, 2024
Copy link

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the lifecycle/stale The issue / pull request is stale, any activities remove this label. label Jan 18, 2025
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Feb 8, 2025

This issue has been automatically closed because it has not had recent activity. Please comment "/reopen" to reopen it.

@github-actions github-actions bot closed this as completed Feb 8, 2025
@dariuszg-gc
Copy link
Author

/reopen

Copy link

@dariuszg-gc: Reopened this issue.

In response to this:

/reopen

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.

@google-oss-prow google-oss-prow bot reopened this Mar 5, 2025
@dariuszg-gc
Copy link
Author

/remove-lifecycle stale

@google-oss-prow google-oss-prow bot removed the lifecycle/stale The issue / pull request is stale, any activities remove this label. label Mar 5, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant