-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 51
Allow interaction with ray client service via Route from outside of OCP cluster #100
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
Allow interaction with ray client service via Route from outside of OCP cluster #100
Conversation
5f65ec2
to
d6175c4
Compare
dbd8fc8
to
c509066
Compare
@MichaelClifford I passed all the tests. looks good. I also renamed the example notebook. |
Thanks for adding more tests @tedhtchang LGTM |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM, thank you Ted!
Note, for testing, there were two items that were different from what was listed:
- Had to install
pip install -r requirements.txt
in addition to the requirements-dev.txt in order to get openshift installed in my pyenv - The notebook file is named
local_interactive.ipynb
dbd5778
to
bd0934a
Compare
@tedhtchang, with the latest code with the Ray Operator v0.5.0, the worker is now able to start all 3 init containers and that's working ok. But when I try to do the
|
Tested on my own mac and another Ubuntu VM from scratch. Both env seems to work. @MichaelClifford @Maxusmusti Could you test again? |
I tried one last time last night and local interaction worked on my cluster to |
OK - tried on the IBM network with both |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM Ted, passing the tests in two namespaces
Thank you!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM
Tested in both default and non-default namespaces... looks good.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM!
Tested PR on cluster with KubeRay v0.5.0 and works as expected.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good! Just two quick comments before I merge
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM
How to test:
Expect something
