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

improve how we setup eval/save strategies and steps #547

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Sep 13, 2023
Merged

Conversation

winglian
Copy link
Collaborator

No description provided.

# save_steps implies save_strategy of steps
training_arguments_kwargs["save_strategy"] = "steps"
training_arguments_kwargs["save_steps"] = cfg.save_steps
elif cfg.save_strategy:
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

One side effect would be that: individuals who depend on save_strategy: epoch/no and forget to remove save_step would get a different result. However, this change is good as it's more logical.

@winglian winglian merged commit 36e53c7 into main Sep 13, 2023
@winglian winglian deleted the eval_strat-fix branch September 13, 2023 15:37
@winglian winglian mentioned this pull request Sep 25, 2023
mkeoliya pushed a commit to mkeoliya/axolotl that referenced this pull request Dec 15, 2023
…#547)

* setup save end eval strategies to be consistent with trainer logic

* add comments

* better eval handling
djsaunde pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 17, 2024
* setup save end eval strategies to be consistent with trainer logic

* add comments

* better eval handling
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants