RFC: Benchmarking scenarios #99
Draft
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
sjmonson
force-pushed
the
feat/scenarios
branch
from
81c35db to
91651b0
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This PR adds support for "scenarios" that allow specifying benchmark argument in a file / as a single Pydantic object. CLI argument defaults are loaded from the scenario object defaults to give benchmark-as-code users the same defaults as CLI. Argument values in the CLI follow the following precedence:
Scenario (class defaults) < Scenario (CLI provided Scenario) < CLI Arguments.This PR is not in a finalized state but comments on design are encouraged.
Closes: