Changed serialization mechanism of LambdaLR scheduler #9927
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
0phoff
requested review from
apaszke,
colesbury,
ezyang,
gchanan,
soumith and
zdevito
as code owners
Member
|
Adding a test would be great! |
Contributor
|
this looks good. add a smoke test and this is good to go. |
The lr_lambda functions are only saved if the are callable objects (which can be stateful). There is no point in saving functions/lambdas as you need their definition before unpickling.
0phoff
force-pushed
the
serialize_lambdalr
branch
from
797864f to
66d924b
Compare
Contributor
Author
soumith
approved these changes
Jul 30, 2018
Contributor
facebook-github-bot
left a comment
facebook-github-bot
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
soumith is landing this pull request. If you are a Facebook employee, you can view this diff on Phabricator.
goodlux
pushed a commit
to goodlux/pytorch
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 15, 2018
Summary: I opened an issue explaining some of my frustrations with the current state of schedulers. While most points that I raised in [that issue](pytorch#8741 (comment)) need to be discussed more thoroughly before being implemented, there are some that are not so difficult to fix. This PR changes the way the LambdaLR scheduler gets serialized: > The lr_lambda functions are only saved if the are callable objects (which can be stateful). > There is no point in saving functions/lambdas as you need their definition before unpickling and they are stateless. This has the big advantage that the scheduler is serializable, even if you use lambda functions or locally defined functions (aka a function in a function). Does this functionality need any unit tests? Pull Request resolved: pytorch#9927 Differential Revision: D9055505 Pulled By: soumith fbshipit-source-id: 6c1cec588beedd098ec7d2bce6a9add27f29e48f
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
5 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
I opened an issue explaining some of my frustrations with the current state of schedulers.
While most points that I raised in that issue need to be discussed more thoroughly before being implemented, there are some that are not so difficult to fix.
This PR changes the way the LambdaLR scheduler gets serialized:
This has the big advantage that the scheduler is serializable, even if you use lambda functions or locally defined functions (aka a function in a function).
Does this functionality need any unit tests?