Skip to content

Conversation

htahir1
Copy link
Contributor

@htahir1 htahir1 commented Jul 10, 2025

Describe changes

I implemented/fixed _ to achieve _.

Pre-requisites

Please ensure you have done the following:

  • I have read the CONTRIBUTING.md document.
  • I have added tests to cover my changes.
  • I have based my new branch on develop and the open PR is targeting develop. If your branch wasn't based on develop read Contribution guide on rebasing branch to develop.
  • IMPORTANT: I made sure that my changes are reflected properly in the following resources:
    • ZenML Docs
    • Dashboard: Needs to be communicated to the frontend team.
    • Templates: Might need adjustments (that are not reflected in the template tests) in case of non-breaking changes and deprecations.
    • Projects: Depending on the version dependencies, different projects might get affected.

Types of changes

  • 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 change)
  • Other (add details above)

@htahir1 htahir1 requested a review from schustmi July 10, 2025 17:11
@htahir1 htahir1 marked this pull request as ready for review July 10, 2025 17:11
@github-actions github-actions bot added the internal To filter out internal PRs and issues label Jul 10, 2025
Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Jul 10, 2025

Important

Review skipped

Auto reviews are disabled on this repository.

Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the .coderabbit.yaml file in this repository. To trigger a single review, invoke the @coderabbitai review command.

You can disable this status message by setting the reviews.review_status to false in the CodeRabbit configuration file.


Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Explain this complex logic.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai explain this code block.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and explain its main purpose.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Support

Need help? Create a ticket on our support page for assistance with any issues or questions.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate sequence diagram to generate a sequence diagram of the changes in this PR.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Jul 10, 2025

Documentation Link Check Results

Absolute links check passed
Relative links check passed
Last checked: 2025-07-11 13:07:33 UTC

print(f"Waiting for {len(run_ids)} chunk processing runs to complete...")
while True:
completed_runs = 0
for run_id in run_ids:
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This should IMO cache already successful runs, and don't fetch it again.

Also, we need one of the following two:

  • Either this step fails as soon as one template fails
  • Or the aggregate step somehow handles failed runs, which might not have the artifacts its trying to load. But this should be somehow logged or communicated to the user, otherwise the aggregation will simply be wrong.

Second one is better I think

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@schustmi agreed done!



@pipeline
def master_pipeline(template_id: Optional[UUID] = None):
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Why not fan_out_fan_in_pipeline to keep it consistent?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@schustmi agreed done!

@htahir1 htahir1 requested a review from schustmi July 11, 2025 07:42
run = client.get_pipeline_run(run_id)

# Check if run succeeded
if run.status.is_failed:
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This is_failed doesn't exit I think? I think you should try to run this once at least to see if the code works

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I assumed it existed because the is_success thing existed... ill try to run it

"""Whether the execution status refers to a successful execution.

Returns:
Whether the execution status refers to a successful execution.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
Whether the execution status refers to a successful execution.
Whether the execution status refers to a failed execution.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

wait i havnt requested review yet!!

@@ -107,6 +107,15 @@ def is_successful(self) -> bool:
"""
return self in {ExecutionStatus.COMPLETED, ExecutionStatus.CACHED}

@property
def is_failed(self) -> bool:
"""Whether the execution status refers to a successful execution.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
"""Whether the execution status refers to a successful execution.
"""Whether the execution status refers to a failed execution.

@htahir1 htahir1 requested a review from schustmi July 11, 2025 08:49
"""Trigger multiple pipeline runs for each chunk and wait for completion."""
client = Client()

# Use template ID if provided, otherwise use pipeline name
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Do you think it's worth explaining what happens here? Right now you're saying "use pipeline name", but that doesn't really mean anything to anyone. What this does is fetch the latest template for the pipeline with that name

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Fixed

Comment on lines 463 to 465
# First, make sure you run the chunk_processing_pipeline once
# on a remote orchestrator:
# chunk_processing_pipeline()
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Instead of doing this and later calling Client().create_run_template, you can simply call chunk_processing_pipeline.create_run_template(name=...)

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Didnt know that! Thats great!

@htahir1 htahir1 requested a review from schustmi July 11, 2025 09:01
# Make sure a remote stack is set before running this
template = chunk_processing_pipeline.create_run_template(
name="chunk_processing_template",
deployment_id=run.deployment_id,
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This doesn't exist anymore, and is also not needed in this call

@htahir1 htahir1 requested a review from schustmi July 11, 2025 12:57
@htahir1 htahir1 merged commit 07beafb into develop Jul 11, 2025
28 of 43 checks passed
@htahir1 htahir1 deleted the doc/fanoutfaninpattern branch July 11, 2025 13:08
htahir1 added a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 11, 2025
* Add dynamic fan-out/fan-in with run templates

* Refactor code for advanced features in pipelines

* Refactor chunk processing and results aggregation

* Add `is_failed` property to `ExecutionStatus` enum

* Update check for failed runs to use run status value

* Remove unnecessary import in advanced_features.md

* Update is_failed property return statement to refer to failed execution

* Update advanced features with improved process_chunk logic

* Update advanced features documentation and usage example

* Update docs/book/how-to/steps-pipelines/advanced_features.md

(cherry picked from commit 07beafb)
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
internal To filter out internal PRs and issues
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants