-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12
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
Thoughts on Model Management #28
Comments
Hmm,
Make the model selection less flexible while keep the multi-model support capability seems important in design. |
the approach will not make the donation process complicated, but will require donors to put more effort into managing donated nodes.
by setting up an index of <model, node> mapping, the operation can be completed in O(1) complexity.
This is inevitable. We need a solution that classifies the workload of tasks and the computing power of nodes. However, that's another story. We can add it as a to-do item to our roadmap for now.
agree |
Your model is very poor |
Similar to many ML frameworks such as tensorflow, pytorch etc. which provide various models in a model zoo, we could add a few (e.g. 3-5) typical/SOTA models with wide applications. With more contributors later on, more models/APIs could be integrated. |
Absolutely! As an open AI infrastructure platform, it's crucial for model support to be freely available. However, we can take a step-by-step approach to the process. We'll gradually expand model support and eventually transition to allowing users to define their own models. |
After play with Playground for a while, I feel that the models supported by DAN are still too few. I am thinking about how to make DAN support as many models as possible.
Here is a possible solution:
This solution requires dan-node to provide a set of management functions, so the implementation of this solution may have to be postponed until the implementation of custom nodes.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: