-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 110
accept memory and gpu memory in GiB instead of MiB #36
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
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good overall! just some nits with comment corrections.
Out of curiosity, did you consider taking either as input (MiB or GiB) in an effort to maintain backwards compat? I feel like one could establish some reasonable bounds to determine whether the input was MiB or GiB, but figured you'd have more context/already figured out it wouldn't work.
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #36 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 90.05% 88.92% -1.14%
==========================================
Files 8 9 +1
Lines 875 1056 +181
==========================================
+ Hits 788 939 +151
- Misses 57 81 +24
- Partials 30 36 +6
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
@brycahta I don't think it would work to accept both without a suffix. There are currently 32 instance types that have between 512-24,576 GiB of memory and 88 instance types that have between 512-21,000 MiB which would overlap the top 32. The user experience of not knowing exactly what the input will be parsed as seems bad too. I did consider a suffix
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
add suffixes
there seems to be something wrong with this travis VM. I ran the tests on the same branch on my fork and everything passes: https://travis-ci.org/github/bwagner5/amazon-ec2-instance-selector/builds/711445177 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
had a couple minor comments but overall looks solid 👍🏼 Loving the support for all the units!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM👍🏼
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM 👍
Issue #, if available:
N/A
Description of changes:
By submitting this pull request, I confirm that you can use, modify, copy, and redistribute this contribution, under the terms of your choice.