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

add smtplan+ #41

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Aug 10, 2021
Merged

add smtplan+ #41

merged 3 commits into from
Aug 10, 2021

Conversation

jdekarske
Copy link
Contributor

Inspired from some discussion here.

The image is nearly 1GB for now. A multi stage build is likely a next step.

Would it be good practice to add the singularity definition file into the packages directory since this doesn't exist in the smtplan repo?

@haz
Copy link
Contributor

haz commented Jul 27, 2021

Awesome! Thoughts...

  • 1Gb is indeed a heavy hit. Have you taken a crack on some of the tips here?

  • Should the package be smtplan+ or smtplan? If it's all the same, the latter might be better. It means that it would be exposed as .../smtplan/solve in the upcoming replacement for the online solver.

  • Not sure where the singularity image should live. I think not planutils...would adding just that file to the smtplan repo be viable as a PR? Does seem like the most natural place to me. It's the model FD follows: https://github.com/aibasel/downward/tree/main/misc/releases/20.06

@jdekarske
Copy link
Contributor Author

We are down to 148 MB after a multi-stage build 😄. The solver binary is quite large and I don't plan on putting a lot of energy in to fixing that.

KCL site says "SMTPlan+"
publication says "SMTPlan+"
github repo is called "SMTPlan" and the binary is "SMTPlan", but the readme says "SMTPlan+"

I'll take this to mean we can use the name less the '+' for functional things, but keep it for documentation. I'm open to do whatever, and we can ping the KCL folks.

I PR'd to the original repo using the FD model.

@haz
Copy link
Contributor

haz commented Aug 10, 2021

Awesome stuff! There's been some discussion on maybe just pulling images from dockerhub (there's a way to do it via singularity, and it rebuilds the docker container as a singularity one). For now, though, I see no reason we can't pull from your shub lib.

Only recommendation is to change the directory name -- from smtplan+ to smtplan. It's the folder name (not the .sif name) that will count when we deploy.

@jdekarske
Copy link
Contributor Author

Done!

There's been some discussion on maybe just pulling images from dockerhub

That is actually what my singularity definition does (from my image on dockerhub).

@haz
Copy link
Contributor

haz commented Aug 10, 2021

Sorry, one last thing! Can you put in the size for the manifest? You can see how lama is install...

$ lama domain.pddl problem.pddl

Package not installed!
  Download & install? [Y/n] y

About to install the following packages: downward (36M), lama (20K)
  Proceed? [Y/n] y
Installing downward...
INFO:    Downloading shub image
 35.88 MiB / 35.88 MiB [=======================================] 100.00% 3.99 MiB/s 8s
Finished installing downward (size: 36M)
Installing lama...
Finished installing lama (size: 20K)
Successfully installed lama!

Original command: lama
  Re-run command? [Y/n] y

Parsing...
$

...and its the Finish installing smtplan (size: ???) that you're looking for.

@haz
Copy link
Contributor

haz commented Aug 10, 2021

All set, thanks!!

@haz haz merged commit 273f5b2 into AI-Planning:master Aug 10, 2021
@haz
Copy link
Contributor

haz commented Aug 23, 2021

You should be able to pull the latest now, with smtplan intact. Thanks again!

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