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

chore(llmobs): fix behavior for running multiple evaluators #11986

Merged
merged 7 commits into from
Jan 17, 2025

Conversation

lievan
Copy link
Contributor

@lievan lievan commented Jan 16, 2025

There was unexpected behavior when turning on multiple evaluators where only the last evaluator in the evaluators list was being run multiple times for one span.

Fix it by replacing executor.map with just individual calls to executor.submit, which should do the same thing but it avoids the the unexpected behavior above

To reproduce: the added test case in this PR fails if we switch back to executor.map. See this CI run for the reproduced error

Checklist

  • PR author has checked that all the criteria below are met
  • The PR description includes an overview of the change
  • The PR description articulates the motivation for the change
  • The change includes tests OR the PR description describes a testing strategy
  • The PR description notes risks associated with the change, if any
  • Newly-added code is easy to change
  • The change follows the library release note guidelines
  • The change includes or references documentation updates if necessary
  • Backport labels are set (if applicable)

Reviewer Checklist

  • Reviewer has checked that all the criteria below are met
  • Title is accurate
  • All changes are related to the pull request's stated goal
  • Avoids breaking API changes
  • Testing strategy adequately addresses listed risks
  • Newly-added code is easy to change
  • Release note makes sense to a user of the library
  • If necessary, author has acknowledged and discussed the performance implications of this PR as reported in the benchmarks PR comment
  • Backport labels are set in a manner that is consistent with the release branch maintenance policy

Copy link
Contributor

CODEOWNERS have been resolved as:

ddtrace/llmobs/_evaluators/runner.py                                    @DataDog/ml-observability
tests/llmobs/_utils.py                                                  @DataDog/ml-observability
tests/llmobs/test_llmobs_evaluator_runner.py                            @DataDog/ml-observability

@datadog-dd-trace-py-rkomorn
Copy link

Datadog Report

Branch report: evan.li/test-multiple
Commit report: 2fc38af
Test service: dd-trace-py

✅ 0 Failed, 219 Passed, 1379 Skipped, 7m 8.35s Total duration (34m 47.25s time saved)

@lievan lievan added the changelog/no-changelog A changelog entry is not required for this PR. label Jan 16, 2025
@lievan lievan changed the title chore(llmobs): fix behavior for running multiple evaluators chore(llmobs): fix behavior for running multiple evaluators Jan 16, 2025
@lievan lievan marked this pull request as ready for review January 16, 2025 16:28
@lievan lievan requested a review from a team as a code owner January 16, 2025 16:28
@pr-commenter
Copy link

pr-commenter bot commented Jan 16, 2025

Benchmarks

Benchmark execution time: 2025-01-17 16:21:00

Comparing candidate commit cad52ed in PR branch evan.li/test-multiple with baseline commit f67a358 in branch main.

Found 0 performance improvements and 0 performance regressions! Performance is the same for 362 metrics, 2 unstable metrics.

ddtrace/llmobs/_evaluators/runner.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@lievan lievan enabled auto-merge (squash) January 16, 2025 19:39
@lievan lievan merged commit 3aa6921 into main Jan 17, 2025
272 checks passed
@lievan lievan deleted the evan.li/test-multiple branch January 17, 2025 16:22
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
changelog/no-changelog A changelog entry is not required for this PR.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants