Skip to content

[RLlib] Remove utilities/tests/classes not needed anymore.#40939

Merged
sven1977 merged 26 commits intoray-project:masterfrom
sven1977:remove_utilities_tests_classes_not_needed_anymore
Nov 20, 2023
Merged

[RLlib] Remove utilities/tests/classes not needed anymore.#40939
sven1977 merged 26 commits intoray-project:masterfrom
sven1977:remove_utilities_tests_classes_not_needed_anymore

Conversation

@sven1977
Copy link
Contributor

@sven1977 sven1977 commented Nov 3, 2023

Remove utilities/tests/classes not needed anymore.

Why are these changes needed?

Related issue number

Checks

  • I've signed off every commit(by using the -s flag, i.e., git commit -s) in this PR.
  • I've run scripts/format.sh to lint the changes in this PR.
  • I've included any doc changes needed for https://docs.ray.io/en/master/.
    • I've added any new APIs to the API Reference. For example, if I added a
      method in Tune, I've added it in doc/source/tune/api/ under the
      corresponding .rst file.
  • I've made sure the tests are passing. Note that there might be a few flaky tests, see the recent failures at https://flakey-tests.ray.io/
  • Testing Strategy
    • Unit tests
    • Release tests
    • This PR is not tested :(

Signed-off-by: sven1977 <svenmika1977@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: sven1977 <svenmika1977@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: sven1977 <svenmika1977@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: sven1977 <svenmika1977@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: sven1977 <svenmika1977@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: sven1977 <svenmika1977@gmail.com>
…ot_needed_anymore' into remove_utilities_tests_classes_not_needed_anymore
Signed-off-by: sven1977 <svenmika1977@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: sven1977 <svenmika1977@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: sven1977 <svenmika1977@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: sven1977 <svenmika1977@gmail.com>
@kouroshHakha
Copy link
Contributor

NOTE: premerge tests are failing.

Copy link
Contributor

@kouroshHakha kouroshHakha left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It's just not clear to me what the decision process behind removals are. I have asked why on some of those that I would probably not have deleted. Some explanation on the process is missing on the PR details.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

why this one?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Undone.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

should we have an equivalent RLModule example for this?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes :) Undone

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We should have a customer EnvRunner equivalent for this?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

More like a custom Learner? The "custom" bit here is the loss function. Undone.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Has this been moved to the contrib folder?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Good catch. This is actually a "tuned_example". Created it in rllib_contrib. It wasn't run as a test in the old CI, but I activated it now. Let's see whether it learns a little bit (0.6 win rate vs random should be doable :) ).

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

why?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This is still an experimental API that we should no longer pursue. It's off by default and will be fully replaced by the new connectors.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

why?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

SlateQ is now in rllib_contrib.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

why?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

undone

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

why?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

undone

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

why?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

undone

Signed-off-by: sven1977 <svenmika1977@gmail.com>
@sven1977
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks for your review @kouroshHakha !
I admit some of the example removals are debateable. The main thought was that some of the more advanced features that we don't really want users to use anymore b/c they will very soon be on the new stack, we can take out already. However, I undid all those examples removals that you questioned.

And yes, we will replace most of our examples with new stack equivalents, but also clean up this folder well (it's become pretty messy over time :( ).

Signed-off-by: sven1977 <svenmika1977@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: sven1977 <svenmika1977@gmail.com>
@sven1977 sven1977 requested a review from a team as a code owner November 20, 2023 16:58
@sven1977 sven1977 merged commit af4c431 into ray-project:master Nov 20, 2023
ujjawal-khare pushed a commit to ujjawal-khare-27/ray that referenced this pull request Nov 29, 2023
simonsays1980 pushed a commit to simonsays1980/ray that referenced this pull request Dec 17, 2025
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.

2 participants