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

No input mapping fix for dag flows #3377

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

singankit
Copy link
Member

Description

Please add an informative description that covers that changes made by the pull request and link all relevant issues.

All Promptflow Contribution checklist:

  • The pull request does not introduce [breaking changes].
  • CHANGELOG is updated for new features, bug fixes or other significant changes.
  • I have read the contribution guidelines.
  • Create an issue and link to the pull request to get dedicated review from promptflow team. Learn more: suggested workflow.

General Guidelines and Best Practices

  • Title of the pull request is clear and informative.
  • There are a small number of commits, each of which have an informative message. This means that previously merged commits do not appear in the history of the PR. For more information on cleaning up the commits in your PR, see this page.

Testing Guidelines

  • Pull request includes test coverage for the included changes.

@singankit singankit requested review from a team as code owners June 5, 2024 06:11
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Jun 5, 2024

promptflow SDK CLI Azure E2E Test Result users/singankit/dag_flow_load_flow_bug

  4 files    4 suites   1m 31s ⏱️
243 tests 126 ✅  40 💤 0 ❌  77 🔥
972 runs  504 ✅ 160 💤 0 ❌ 308 🔥

For more details on these errors, see this check.

Results for commit bd9b411.

Copy link

github-actions bot commented Jun 5, 2024

promptflow-core test result

0 tests   0 ✅  0s ⏱️
0 suites  0 💤
0 files    0 ❌

Results for commit bd9b411.

Copy link

github-actions bot commented Jun 5, 2024

SDK CLI Global Config Test Result users/singankit/dag_flow_load_flow_bug

6 tests   6 ✅  59s ⏱️
1 suites  0 💤
1 files    0 ❌

Results for commit bd9b411.

Copy link

github-actions bot commented Jun 5, 2024

Executor Unit Test Result users/singankit/dag_flow_load_flow_bug

797 tests   796 ✅  3m 45s ⏱️
  1 suites    0 💤
  1 files      1 ❌

For more details on these failures, see this check.

Results for commit bd9b411.

Copy link

github-actions bot commented Jun 5, 2024

Executor E2E Test Result users/singankit/dag_flow_load_flow_bug

246 tests   240 ✅  5m 1s ⏱️
  1 suites    6 💤
  1 files      0 ❌

Results for commit bd9b411.

Copy link

github-actions bot commented Jun 5, 2024

SDK CLI Test Result users/singankit/dag_flow_load_flow_bug

    4 files      4 suites   1h 4m 44s ⏱️
  784 tests   757 ✅ 20 💤  7 ❌
3 136 runs  3 028 ✅ 80 💤 28 ❌

For more details on these failures, see this check.

Results for commit bd9b411.

@@ -86,6 +86,11 @@ def apply_inputs_mapping(
),
invalid_relations=invalid_relations,
)

# if no input mapping is provided, return the original inputs which is data
if not result:
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

add more PR description on what's the case fixed in this PR?

@@ -86,6 +86,11 @@ def apply_inputs_mapping(
),
invalid_relations=invalid_relations,
)

# if no input mapping is provided, return the original inputs which is data
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think it is not a good idea to add such fallback logic in the "apply_inputs_mapping" function, it should know nothing about the special key "data". If we want to do something special for "data", we'd better handle it outside the utils, where the specific scenario uses it.

Copy link

Hi, thank you for your interest in helping to improve the prompt flow experience and for your contribution. We've noticed that there hasn't been recent engagement on this pull request. If this is still an active work stream, please let us know by pushing some changes or leaving a comment.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the no-recent-activity There has been no recent activity on this issue/pull request label Jun 19, 2024
@singankit
Copy link
Member Author

This is under discussion

@github-actions github-actions bot removed the no-recent-activity There has been no recent activity on this issue/pull request label Jun 20, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants