-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 47
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
Container docs #1539
base: develop
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Container docs #1539
Conversation
For further background, see ICB-DCM#1448. We don't have to compute the full gradient in every model simulation. Some entries might not be required because of fixed parameter or some condition-specific objective parameter mapping. The former was supported (however, not tested), the latter was not supported. Now both are tested an supported. There was no good way to communicate the fixed parameters to AmiciCalculator where ExpData.plist gets set. Passing this information is currently only possible through the parameter mapping, based on which the required sensitivities are determined. Therefore, in addition to the general parameter mapping, there is now a parameter mapping that accounts for the fixed parameters. Not sure what could be a more elegant way to handle that.
@stephanmg : Please rebase / remove the unrelated changes |
|
||
We provide a pyPESTO docker image in OCI format through `docker.io/stephanmg/pypesto`. | ||
|
||
Develop versions are pushed as tag ``latest``. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Are they? I don't see any at https://hub.docker.com/r/stephanmg/pypesto.
Also, the workflow uses ICB_DCM/pypesto
.
(-> #1538)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Should be also published now, manually pushed latest image with commit from develop
latest from today: commit sha 20fd9de
If you manually build your container and need to convert to Apptainer, first export your docker image to `.tar` by: | ||
`docker save -o pypesto.tar pypesto:latest` and pull the image before from docker.io by `docker pull docker.io/stephanmg/pypesto:latest`. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why should one go through docker if one wants to use apptainer? apptainer pull docker://stephanmg/pypesto:latest
?
"first export ... pull before..." is somewhat unclear.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Fixed. Has never been triggered from the GHA workflow, merged to develop
yesterday, so next commit should trigger a build and push of the image.
Likewise for singularity: | ||
``singularity build pypesto.sif docker-archive://pypesto.tar`` | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'd leave that out. They are interchangeable.
If you manually build your container and need to convert to Apptainer, first export your docker image to `.tar` by: | ||
`docker save -o pypesto.tar pypesto:latest` and pull the image before from docker.io by `docker pull docker.io/stephanmg/pypesto:latest`. | ||
|
||
Then execute for generating a `.sif` file: | ||
``apptainer build pypesto.sif docker-archive://pypesto.tar`` | ||
|
||
Likewise for singularity: | ||
``singularity build pypesto.sif docker-archive://pypesto.tar`` | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Move that down under the respective heading?
Co-authored-by: Daniel Weindl <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Daniel Weindl <[email protected]>
No description provided.