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 callback method for on_save_checkpoint #2401

Closed
jeremyjordan opened this issue Jun 28, 2020 · 3 comments · Fixed by #2501
Closed

Add callback method for on_save_checkpoint #2401

jeremyjordan opened this issue Jun 28, 2020 · 3 comments · Fixed by #2501
Labels
feature Is an improvement or enhancement help wanted Open to be worked on

Comments

@jeremyjordan
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Feature

We should allow Callback objects to optionally persist state that can be reloaded from checkpoints.

Motivation

We already manually save the state for early stopping and model checkpoint callbacks. This refactor would eliminate callback-specific code in the Trainer and extend the ability to user-written callbacks.

Pitch

This callback would just return a state_dict which the Trainer could store. The only thing that I am unclear how we should handle is for other callbacks how we want to reinitialize the state. If we can expect that the same exact callbacks will be passed to the Trainer then it should be trivial. Or we could expect that you only pass in a single instance of each callback class (eg. callbacks=[CustomerLogger(), EarlyStopping(), ModelCheckpoint()] and not callbacks=[CustomerLogger(params_a), CustomerLogger(params_b), EarlyStopping(), ModelCheckpoint()] and just keep a mapping of callback class to state dicts. However, if the user passed multiple callback instances of the same class I'm not sure how we would want to handle that.

I would recommend that we document the following constraints:

  • All objects in the dictionary must be pickle-able.
  • You cannot persist multiple instances of the same callback class.
@jeremyjordan jeremyjordan added feature Is an improvement or enhancement help wanted Open to be worked on labels Jun 28, 2020
@awaelchli
Copy link
Member

awaelchli commented Jun 28, 2020

I think it is reasonable to assume there is only one instance of these special callbacks (and should raise error otherwise, e.g. see progress bar callback). Note that currently the logger is not a callback.
Also, the documentation for callbacks should probably let the user know that the the order of the list input to the Trainer is not preserved (e.g. the Trainer should reorder it so that the earlystopping callback comes after checkpoint, right?)

@jeremyjordan
Copy link
Contributor Author

Cool, I'll put together a draft PR once we merge #2391 :)

@edenlightning
Copy link
Contributor

also #2631

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
feature Is an improvement or enhancement help wanted Open to be worked on
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants