You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
When defining a workflow, in some cases the output received from a previous step needs to be iterated through and applied to the same processing/function.
let's say we have wf1, with a first step that returns a list of bboxes [[0, 0, 10, 10], [23, 23, 45, 33], ...]. Now, in our 2nd step we're running an inference on a model for each bbox supplied by the first step. This operation would take too long if the 2nd step is only implemented as a simple for loop (especially when running the pipeline needs to happen as quick as possible).
My proposition would be for octopipes to provide a "multiplex" function similar to the "add" function that takes care of running simultaneously the inputs of a previous step on the current step and then collecting the results when propagating them to the next steps (if present).
When defining a workflow, in some cases the output received from a previous step needs to be iterated through and applied to the same processing/function.
let's say we have
wf1
, with a first step that returns a list of bboxes[[0, 0, 10, 10], [23, 23, 45, 33], ...]
. Now, in our 2nd step we're running an inference on a model for each bbox supplied by the first step. This operation would take too long if the 2nd step is only implemented as a simple for loop (especially when running the pipeline needs to happen as quick as possible).My proposition would be for
octopipes
to provide a "multiplex" function similar to the "add" function that takes care of running simultaneously the inputs of a previous step on the current step and then collecting the results when propagating them to the next steps (if present).Here's an example of such a feature
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: