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

Support Mean in DDP Sync #2568

Merged
merged 13 commits into from
Aug 4, 2020
Merged

Support Mean in DDP Sync #2568

merged 13 commits into from
Aug 4, 2020

Conversation

justusschock
Copy link
Member

What does this PR do?

Add support for mean in DDP Sync

Fixes # (issue)

Before submitting

  • Was this discussed/approved via a Github issue? (no need for typos and docs improvements)
  • Did you read the contributor guideline, Pull Request section?
  • Did you make sure your PR does only one thing, instead of bundling different changes together? Otherwise, we ask you to create a separate PR for every change.
  • Did you make sure to update the documentation with your changes?
  • Did you write any new necessary tests?
  • Did you verify new and existing tests pass locally with your changes?
  • If you made a notable change (that affects users), did you update the CHANGELOG?

PR review

Anyone in the community is free to review the PR once the tests have passed.
If we didn't discuss your PR in Github issues there's a high chance it will not be merged.

Did you have fun?

Make sure you had fun coding 🙃

@pep8speaks
Copy link

pep8speaks commented Jul 9, 2020

Hello @justusschock! Thanks for updating this PR.

Line 138:44: E203 whitespace before ','
Line 148:44: E203 whitespace before ','
Line 194:44: E203 whitespace before ','
Line 234:44: E203 whitespace before ','

Comment last updated at 2020-08-04 15:57:36 UTC

@justusschock justusschock self-assigned this Jul 9, 2020
@mergify mergify bot requested a review from a team July 9, 2020 13:08
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jul 9, 2020

Codecov Report

Merging #2568 into master will decrease coverage by 3%.
The diff coverage is 0%.

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master   #2568    +/-   ##
=======================================
- Coverage      88%     86%    -3%     
=======================================
  Files          78      78            
  Lines        7069    6921   -148     
=======================================
- Hits         6250    5932   -318     
- Misses        819     989   +170     

@Borda Borda added the feature Is an improvement or enhancement label Jul 9, 2020
@Borda Borda added this to the 0.8.x milestone Jul 9, 2020
@justusschock
Copy link
Member Author

justusschock commented Jul 9, 2020

@Borda are TPU tests still to be neglected?

Edit: Also the failing GPU Test seems unrelated to the metrics (which is the only thing I touched here)

@Borda
Copy link
Member

Borda commented Jul 9, 2020

@Borda are TPU tests still to be neglected?

TPU shall be fine...

EDIT: ok we have some problem with TPU tests :{

@justusschock justusschock requested review from SkafteNicki, williamFalcon, Borda and a team and removed request for a team, williamFalcon and Borda August 3, 2020 08:19
Copy link
Contributor

@awaelchli awaelchli left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

nice @justusschock, this will be very useful

pytorch_lightning/metrics/converters.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
tests/metrics/test_converters.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@mergify mergify bot requested a review from a team August 3, 2020 09:29
@Borda
Copy link
Member

Borda commented Aug 3, 2020

it seems that the test acc dropped significantly...

>       assert result['test_acc'] > 0.8
--
1102 | E       assert 0.25 > 0.8

@justusschock
Copy link
Member Author

@Borda @williamFalcon @SkafteNicki can we get this done?

@mergify mergify bot requested a review from a team August 4, 2020 08:15
@mergify mergify bot requested a review from a team August 4, 2020 08:34
@justusschock
Copy link
Member Author

@SkafteNicki you're right. This is fixed now.

Copy link
Member

@SkafteNicki SkafteNicki left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

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
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants