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 set_destination API #14249

Merged
merged 9 commits into from
Jan 22, 2025
Merged

Add set_destination API #14249

merged 9 commits into from
Jan 22, 2025

Conversation

B-Step62
Copy link
Collaborator

@B-Step62 B-Step62 commented Jan 15, 2025

🛠 DevTools 🛠

Open in GitHub Codespaces

Install mlflow from this PR

# Use `%sh` to run this command on Databricks
OPTIONS=$(if pip freeze | grep -q 'mlflow @ git+https://github.com/mlflow/mlflow.git'; then echo '--force-reinstall --no-deps'; fi)
pip install $OPTIONS git+https://github.com/mlflow/mlflow.git@refs/pull/14249/merge

Checkout with GitHub CLI

gh pr checkout 14249

What changes are proposed in this pull request?

Add a new set_destination experimental API to support setting the external span exporter provided by the databricks-agents package.

How is this PR tested?

  • Existing unit/integration tests
  • New unit/integration tests
  • Manual tests

Does this PR require documentation update?

  • No. You can skip the rest of this section.
  • Yes. I've updated:
    • Examples
    • API references
    • Instructions

Release Notes

Is this a user-facing change?

  • No. You can skip the rest of this section.
  • Yes. Give a description of this change to be included in the release notes for MLflow users.

What component(s), interfaces, languages, and integrations does this PR affect?

Components

  • area/artifacts: Artifact stores and artifact logging
  • area/build: Build and test infrastructure for MLflow
  • area/deployments: MLflow Deployments client APIs, server, and third-party Deployments integrations
  • area/docs: MLflow documentation pages
  • area/examples: Example code
  • area/model-registry: Model Registry service, APIs, and the fluent client calls for Model Registry
  • area/models: MLmodel format, model serialization/deserialization, flavors
  • area/recipes: Recipes, Recipe APIs, Recipe configs, Recipe Templates
  • area/projects: MLproject format, project running backends
  • area/scoring: MLflow Model server, model deployment tools, Spark UDFs
  • area/server-infra: MLflow Tracking server backend
  • area/tracking: Tracking Service, tracking client APIs, autologging

Interface

  • area/uiux: Front-end, user experience, plotting, JavaScript, JavaScript dev server
  • area/docker: Docker use across MLflow's components, such as MLflow Projects and MLflow Models
  • area/sqlalchemy: Use of SQLAlchemy in the Tracking Service or Model Registry
  • area/windows: Windows support

Language

  • language/r: R APIs and clients
  • language/java: Java APIs and clients
  • language/new: Proposals for new client languages

Integrations

  • integrations/azure: Azure and Azure ML integrations
  • integrations/sagemaker: SageMaker integrations
  • integrations/databricks: Databricks integrations

How should the PR be classified in the release notes? Choose one:

  • rn/none - No description will be included. The PR will be mentioned only by the PR number in the "Small Bugfixes and Documentation Updates" section
  • rn/breaking-change - The PR will be mentioned in the "Breaking Changes" section
  • rn/feature - A new user-facing feature worth mentioning in the release notes
  • rn/bug-fix - A user-facing bug fix worth mentioning in the release notes
  • rn/documentation - A user-facing documentation change worth mentioning in the release notes

Should this PR be included in the next patch release?

Yes should be selected for bug fixes, documentation updates, and other small changes. No should be selected for new features and larger changes. If you're unsure about the release classification of this PR, leave this unchecked to let the maintainers decide.

What is a minor/patch release?
  • Minor release: a release that increments the second part of the version number (e.g., 1.2.0 -> 1.3.0).
    Bug fixes, doc updates and new features usually go into minor releases.
  • Patch release: a release that increments the third part of the version number (e.g., 1.2.0 -> 1.2.1).
    Bug fixes and doc updates usually go into patch releases.
  • Yes (this PR will be cherry-picked and included in the next patch release)
  • No (this PR will be included in the next minor release)

Signed-off-by: B-Step62 <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: B-Step62 <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: B-Step62 <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: B-Step62 <[email protected]>
@github-actions github-actions bot added area/tracking Tracking service, tracking client APIs, autologging rn/none List under Small Changes in Changelogs. v2.20.0 Release blocker for version 2.20.0 labels Jan 15, 2025
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Jan 15, 2025

Documentation preview for 15a442a will be available when this CircleCI job
completes successfully.

More info

_logger = logging.getLogger(__name__)


class LocalSpanProcessor(SimpleSpanProcessor):
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@B-Step62 B-Step62 Jan 15, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

note: This class has large logic overlap with InferenceTableSpanProcessor. I will refactor it in a follow-up to minimize the blast radius of shipping this change in between RC and stable release.

The exporter is responsible for implementing the logic to send generated
traces to the desired destination, such as a trace collector endpoint.
"""
# The destination needs to be persisted because the tracer setup can be re-initialized sometimes
Copy link
Collaborator

@dbczumar dbczumar Jan 15, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Can we be more specific about when it's reinitialized?

@@ -116,6 +122,28 @@ def detach_span_from_context(token: contextvars.Token):
context_api.detach(token)


@experimental
def set_destination(destination: SpanExporter):
Copy link
Collaborator

@dbczumar dbczumar Jan 15, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

What's the UX if a user wants to set a particular experiment as the destination for their traces? They should just be able to pass the experiment info in, right?

I'm wondering if making users reason about constructing SpanExporter instances is the right API here.

It would be nice if developers defined a "destination" object or URI that users passed in here. Developers could then define the appropriate exporter to be used for sending the traces to that destination. This would also resolve a small terminology gripe I have: an exporter is different from a destination. An exporter is a tool used to send traces to a destination.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

As discussed offline, I've updated the logic as follows:

  1. Add TraceDestination base class ("destination" object) and added MlflowExperiment destination that takes experiment ID and tracking URI.
  2. Updated set_destination API to take the desintation object.
  3. The span processor/exporter is hardcoded right now, but we will update it to pluggable registry after the 2.20 release. (Not doing it here to avoid regression).

Comment on lines 185 to 187
from mlflow.tracing.processor.local import LocalSpanProcessor

processor = LocalSpanProcessor(_MLFLOW_TRACE_CUSTOM_EXPORTER)
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Following from https://github.com/mlflow/mlflow/pull/14249/files#r1916019408, what happens if we want to support setting a particular experiment as a destination? Is LocalSpanProcessor still appropriate for that?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

@B-Step62 B-Step62 Jan 15, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

With the change mentioned above, when a user passes MlflowExperiment desintation, MLflow selects theMlflowSpanProcessor and the corresponding exporter.

Signed-off-by: B-Step62 <[email protected]>
@B-Step62 B-Step62 requested a review from dbczumar January 15, 2025 16:22
Signed-off-by: B-Step62 <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: B-Step62 <[email protected]>
Comment on lines +207 to +223
if isinstance(_MLFLOW_TRACE_USER_DESTINATION, MlflowExperiment):
from mlflow import MlflowClient
from mlflow.tracing.export.mlflow import MlflowSpanExporter
from mlflow.tracing.processor.mlflow import MlflowSpanProcessor

client = MlflowClient(tracking_uri=_MLFLOW_TRACE_USER_DESTINATION.tracking_uri)
exporter = MlflowSpanExporter(client)
processor = MlflowSpanProcessor(
exporter, client, _MLFLOW_TRACE_USER_DESTINATION.experiment_id
)

else:
from mlflow.tracing.export.databricks_agent import DatabricksAgentSpanExporter
from mlflow.tracing.processor.databricks_agent import DatabricksAgentSpanProcessor

exporter = DatabricksAgentSpanExporter(_MLFLOW_TRACE_USER_DESTINATION)
processor = DatabricksAgentSpanProcessor(exporter)
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It would be nice if the Destination implementation defined this logic within the class, e.g. via get_exporter() and get_processor() developer-facing (not user-facing) methods.

Otherwise, it's hard for other developers to add new destinations without modifying provider.py. Eventually, it would be nice to enable developers to define destinations in other packages (e.g. via a plugin system); having the destination define exporter & processor itself would be a good step towards this goal.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Absolutely! @dbczumar can I do that in a follow-up? This part will be entirely replaced by the new pluggable registry implementation, and I can make sure the destination to have exporter/processor control. The intention in this PR is trying to make blast radius minimum because we are bypassing RC.

Signed-off-by: B-Step62 <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: B-Step62 <[email protected]>
@B-Step62 B-Step62 requested a review from dbczumar January 17, 2025 06:32
Copy link
Collaborator

@dbczumar dbczumar left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM!

@B-Step62 B-Step62 added this pull request to the merge queue Jan 22, 2025
Merged via the queue into mlflow:master with commit 0161bbf Jan 22, 2025
51 checks passed
@B-Step62 B-Step62 deleted the trace-destination branch January 22, 2025 00:06
harupy pushed a commit to harupy/mlflow that referenced this pull request Jan 23, 2025
harupy pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 23, 2025
karthikkurella pushed a commit to karthikkurella/mlflow that referenced this pull request Jan 30, 2025
Signed-off-by: B-Step62 <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: k99kurella <[email protected]>
karthikkurella pushed a commit to karthikkurella/mlflow that referenced this pull request Jan 30, 2025
Signed-off-by: B-Step62 <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: k99kurella <[email protected]>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
area/tracking Tracking service, tracking client APIs, autologging rn/none List under Small Changes in Changelogs. v2.20.0 Release blocker for version 2.20.0
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants