Is there a way to install the latest nightly package without having to specify exact date?
Thanks, Lin On Sun, Dec 8, 2019 at 6:13 PM Lausen, Leonard <[email protected]> wrote: > From Shanghai, the closest endpoint (automatically chosen endpoint) is in > Tokyo > and download speed for mxnet-mkl was on average 1.7 MB/s with a maximum of > 5 > MB/s during my test. > > On Sun, 2019-12-08 at 01:30 +0000, Sheng Zha wrote: > > > Heres a set of links for today’s builds > > > > > > (Plain mxnet, no mkl no cuda) > > > > https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl > > > (mxnet-mkl) > > > > https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet_mkl-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl > > > (mxnet-cuXXX) > > > > https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet_cu90-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl > > > > https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet_cu92-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl > > > > https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet_cu100-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl > > > > https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet_cu101-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl > > > (mxnet-cuXXXmkl) > > > > https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet_cu90mkl-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl > > > > https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet_cu92mkl-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl > > > > https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet_cu100mkl-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl > > > > https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet_cu101mkl-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl > > > > These links are not utilizing the s3 accelerate feature (i.e. not backed > by > > cloudfront edges). Please use repo.mxnet.io instead. The updated links > are: > > (Plain mxnet, no mkl no cuda) > > > https://repo.mxnet.io/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl > > (mxnet-mkl) > > > https://repo.mxnet.io/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet_mkl-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl > > (mxnet-cuXXX) > > > https://repo.mxnet.io/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet_cu90-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl > > > https://repo.mxnet.io/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet_cu92-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl > > > https://repo.mxnet.io/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet_cu100-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl > > > https://repo.mxnet.io/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet_cu101-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl > > (mxnet-cuXXXmkl) > > > https://repo.mxnet.io/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet_cu90mkl-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl > > > https://repo.mxnet.io/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet_cu92mkl-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl > > > https://repo.mxnet.io/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet_cu100mkl-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl > > > https://repo.mxnet.io/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet_cu101mkl-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl > > > > When updating the installation doc we should use repo.mxnet.io domain > name > > too. > > > > Best, > > -sz > > > > On 2019/12/07 17:39:40, "Skalicky, Sam" <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Hi MXNet Community, > > > > > > We have been working on getting nightly builds fixed and made available > > > again. We’ve made another system using AWS CodeBuild & S3 to work > around the > > > problems with Jenkins CI, PyPI, etc. It is currently building all the > > > flavors and publishing to an S3 bucket here: > > > > https://us-west-2.console.aws.amazon.com/s3/buckets/apache-mxnet/dist/?region=us-west-2 > > > > > > There are folders for each set of nightly builds, try out the wheels > > > starting today 2019-12-07. Builds start at 1:30am PT (9:30am GMT) and > arrive > > > in the bucket 30min-2hours later. Inside each folder are the wheels > for each > > > flavor of MXNet. Currently we’re only building for linux, builds for > > > windows/Mac will come later. > > > > > > If you want to download the wheels easily you can use a URL in the > form of: > > > https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/ > <YYYY-MM-DD>/dist/<mxnet_build>-1.6.0b<YYYYMMDD>-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl > > > > > > Heres a set of links for today’s builds > > > > > > (Plain mxnet, no mkl no cuda) > > > > https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl > > > (mxnet-mkl) > > > > https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet_mkl-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl > > > (mxnet-cuXXX) > > > > https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet_cu90-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl > > > > https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet_cu92-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl > > > > https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet_cu100-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl > > > > https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet_cu101-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl > > > (mxnet-cuXXXmkl) > > > > https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet_cu90mkl-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl > > > > https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet_cu92mkl-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl > > > > https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet_cu100mkl-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl > > > > https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet_cu101mkl-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl > > > > > > You can easily install these pip wheels in your system either by > downloading > > > them to your machine first and then installing by doing: > > > > > > pip install /path/to/downloaded/wheel.whl > > > > > > Or you can install directly by just giving the link to pip like this: > > > > > > pip install > > > > https://apache-mxnet.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/dist/2019-12-07/dist/mxnet-1.6.0b20191207-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl > > > > > > Credit goes to everyone involved (in no particular order) > > > Rakesh Vasudevan > > > Zach Kimberg > > > Manu Seth > > > Sheng Zha > > > Jun Wu > > > Pedro Larroy > > > Chaitanya Bapat > > > > > > Thanks! > > > Sam > > > > > > > > > On Dec 5, 2019, at 1:16 AM, Lausen, Leonard <[email protected] > <mailt > > > o:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > > > > We don't loose pip by hosting on S3. We just don't host nightly > releases on > > > Pypi > > > servers and mirror them to several hundred mirrors immediately after > each > > > build > > > is published which is very expensive for the Pypi project.. People can > still > > > install the nightly builds with pip by specifying the -f option. > > > > > > Uploading weekly releases to Pypi will reduce the cost for Pypi by > ~75% [1]. > > > It > > > may be acceptable to Pypi, but does it make sense for us? I'm not > convinced > > > weekly release on Pypi is a good idea. Consider one release is buggy, > users > > > will > > > need to wait for 7 days for a fix. It doesn't provide good user > experience. > > > If someone has a stronger conviction about the value of weekly > releases on > > > Pypi, > > > that person shall please go ahead and propose it in a separate > discussion > > > thread. > > > > > > Currently we don't have generally working nightly builds to Pypi and > as a > > > matter > > > of fact we know that we can't have them due to Pypi's policy and our > > > apparent > > > need for large binaries. Given this fact and that no objection was > raised by > > > 2019-12-05 at 05:42 UTC, I conclude we have lazy consensus on stopping > > > upload > > > attempts of nightly builds to Pypi. > > > > > > With consensus established, we can change the CI job to stop trying to > > > upload > > > the nightly builds and then request Pypi to increase the limit. Then > we have > > > one > > > less blocker for the 1.6 release. > > > > > > Best regards > > > Leonard > > > > > > [1]: Lower cost due to less releases, but higher cost due to 500MB -> > 800MB > > > limit increase. Assuming that the limit increase translates into > actually > > > larger > > > binaries. > > > > > > > > > On Wed, 2019-12-04 at 22:20 +0100, Marco de Abreu wrote: > > > Are weekly releases an option? It was brought up as concern that we > might > > > lose pip as a pretty common distribution channel where people consume > > > nightly builds. I don't feel like that concern has been properly > addressed > > > so far. > > > > > > -Marco > > > > > > Lausen, Leonard <[email protected]<mailto: > [email protected]> > > > > schrieb am Mi., 4. Dez. 2019, > > > 04:09: > > > > > > As a simple POC to test distribution, you can try installing MXNet > based on > > > these 3 URLs: > > > > > > pip install --no-cache-dir > > > > > > > https://mxnet-dev.s3.amazonaws.com/mxnet_cu101-1.5.1.post0-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl > > > pip install --no-cache-dir > > > > > > > https://mxnet-dev.s3-accelerate.amazonaws.com/mxnet_cu101-1.5.1.post0-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl > > > pip install --no-cache-dir https://d19zq12jzu4w95.cloudfront.net/ > > > mxnet_cu101-1.5.1.post0-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl > > > < > > > > https://d19zq12jzu4w95.cloudfront.net/mxnet_cu101-1.5.1.post0-py2.py3-none-manylinux1_x86_64.whl > > > > > > > > > where --no-cache-dir prevents caching the downloaded file, for the > purpose > > > of > > > testing. (cu101 chosen based on large size) > > > > > > The first URL uses standard S3 bucket in US. The second uses S3 > Accelerate > > > based > > > on CloudFront CDN. And the third uses CloudFront CDN. I'm adding the > third > > > URL, > > > as S3 Accelerate may or may not use all new CloudFront endpoints yet. > > > > > > Regarding voting: Uploading to Pypi is currently impossible, which is a > > > reality > > > (so there is no option to continue as we do currently). Pypi folks > > > indicated > > > they will unblock our uploads to Pypi once we stop uploading nightly > > > releases > > > and taking up 20% of their ressources [1]. > > > > > > If there are any shortcomings or problems identified with uploading to > S3, > > > we > > > can work to address them. But for now, status quo is broken and this > seems > > > the > > > only solution addressing Pypi's problem. > > > > > > I don't mind if you state that you object to lazy consensus and start a > > > vote. If > > > your "maybe [...] start a proper vote" was supposed to be an objection > to > > > lazy > > > consensus, please state so clearly (I'm not sure if "maybe" qualifies > as > > > objection). Though I think it only makes sense with at least 2 options > to > > > vote > > > on. Status quo is not a meaningful option, as it is already broken. > > > > > > Best regards > > > Leonard > > > > > > [1]: > https://github.com/pypa/pypi-support/issues/50#issuecomment-560479706 > > > > > > On Tue, 2019-12-03 at 19:28 +0100, Marco de Abreu wrote: > > > Excellent! Could we maybe come up with a POC and a quick writeup and > then > > > start a proper vote after everyone verified that it covers their > > > use-cases? > > > -Marco > > > > > > Sheng Zha <[email protected]> schrieb am Di., 3. Dez. 2019, 19:24: > > > > > > Yes, there is. We can also make it easier to access by using a > > > geo-location based DNS server so that China users are directed to that > > > local mirror. The rest of the world is already covered by the global > > > cloudfront. > > > > > > -sz > > > > > > On 2019/12/03 18:22:22, Marco de Abreu <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > Isn't there an s3 endpoint in Beijing? > > > > > > It seems like this topic still warrants some discussion and thus I'd > > > > > > prefer > > > if we don't move forward with lazy consensus. > > > > > > -Marco > > > > > > Tao Lv <[email protected]> schrieb am Di., 3. Dez. 2019, 14:31: > > > > > > * For pypi, we can use mirrors. > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 3, 2019 at 9:28 PM Tao Lv <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > As we have many users in China, I'm considering the > > > accessibility of > > > S3. > > > For pip, we can mirrors. > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 3, 2019 at 3:24 PM Lausen, Leonard > > > > > > <[email protected] > > > wrote: > > > > > > I would like to remind everyone that lazy consensus is assumed > > > if no > > > objections > > > are raised before 2019-12-05 at 05:42 UTC. There has been some > > > > > > discussion > > > about > > > the proposal, but to my understanding no objections were > > > raised. > > > If the proposal is accepted, MXNet releases would be installed > > > via > > > pip install mxnet > > > > > > And release candidates via > > > > > > pip install --pre mxnet > > > > > > (or with the respective cuda version specifier appended etc.) > > > > > > To obtain releases built automatically from the master branch, > > > users > > > would need > > > to specify something like "-f > > > http://mxnet.s3.amazonaws.com/mxnet-X/nightly.html"; option to > > > pip. > > > Best regards > > > Leonard > > > > > > On Mon, 2019-12-02 at 05:42 +0000, Lausen, Leonard wrote: > > > Hi MXNet Community, > > > > > > since more than 2 months our binary Python nightly releases > > > > > > published > > > on Pypi > > > are broken. The problem is that our binaries exceed Pypi's > > > size > > > limit. > > > Decreasing the binary size by adding compression breaks > > > > > > third-party > > > libraries > > > loading libmxnet.so > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues/16193 > > > Sheng requested Pypi to increase their size limit: > > > https://github.com/pypa/pypi-support/issues/50 > > > > > > Currently "the biggest cost for PyPI from [the many MXNet > > > binaries > > > with > > > nightly > > > release to Pypi] is the bandwidth consumed when several > > > hundred > > > mirrors > > > attempt > > > to mirror each release immediately after it's published". So > > > Pypi > > > is > > > not > > > inclined to allow us to upload even larger binaries on a > > > nightly > > > schedule. > > > Their compromise is to allow it on a weekly cadence. > > > > > > However, I would like the community to revisit the necessity > > > of > > > releasing pre- > > > release binaries to Pypi on a nightly (or weekly) cadence. > > > > > > Instead, we > > > can > > > release nightly binaries ONLY to a public S3 bucket and > > > instruct > > > users > > > to > > > install from there. On our side, we only need to prepare a > > > html > > > document that > > > contains links to all released nightly binaries. > > > Finally users will install the nightly releases via > > > > > > pip install --pre mxnet-cu101 -f > > > > > > http://mxnet.s3.amazonaws.com/mxnet-cu101/ > > > nightly.html > > > > > > Instead of > > > > > > pip install --pre mxnet-cu101 > > > > > > Of course proper releases and release candidates should > > > still be > > > made > > > available > > > via Pypi. Thus releases would be installed via > > > > > > pip install mxnet-cu101 > > > > > > And release candidates via > > > > > > pip install --pre mxnet-cu101 > > > > > > This will substantially reduce the costs of the Pypi project > > > and > > > in > > > fact > > > matches > > > the installation experience provided by PyTorch. I don't > > > think the > > > benefit of > > > not including "-f > > > > > > http://mxnet.s3.amazonaws.com/mxnet-cu101/nightly.html"; > > > matches the costs we currently externalize to the Pypi team. > > > > > > This suggestion seems uncontroversial to me. Thus I would > > > like to > > > start > > > lazy > > > consensus. If there are no objections, I will assume lazy > > > > > > consensus on > > > stopping > > > nightly releases to Pypi in 72hrs. > > > > > > Best regards > > > Leonard > > > > > > >
