Wow! That answer truly solved my problem. I would have never thought of
using threading.local for this. Thank you so much! If you ever stop by
Stockholm I'll be happy to buy you guys a beer!


On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 6:38 PM, Ahmet Altay <[email protected]> wrote:

> You can see an example implementation of Luke's suggestion in the
> tensorflow-transform project [1]. Thread local is used in that case, this
> will work for runners that re-use the same thread to execute bundles.
>
> [1] 
> *https://github.com/tensorflow/transform/blob/master/tensorflow_transform/beam/impl.py#L253
> <https://github.com/tensorflow/transform/blob/master/tensorflow_transform/beam/impl.py#L253>*
>
> On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 8:00 AM, Lukasz Cwik <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Why not use a singleton like pattern and have a function which either
>> loads and caches the ML model from a side input or returns the singleton if
>> it has been loaded.
>> You'll want to use some form of locking to ensure that you really only
>> load the ML model once.
>>
>> On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 6:18 AM, Vilhelm von Ehrenheim <
>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all!
>>> I would like to load a heavy object (think ML model) into memory that
>>> should be available in a ParDo for quick predictions.
>>>
>>> What is the preferred way of doing this without loading the model for
>>> each ParDo call (slow and will flood memory on the nodes). I don't seem to
>>> be able to do it in the DoFn's __init__ block either as this is only done
>>> once for all nodes (my guess here though) and then it breaks when
>>> replicated internally (even on the DirectRunner, I suspect it is pickled
>>> and this object cannot be pickled). If I load it as a side input it seems
>>> to still be loaded into memory separately for each ParDo.
>>>
>>> If there is a better way to handle it in Java I'm happy to do it there
>>> instead. It was just easier to attack the problem w python as the models
>>> were developed in python.
>>>
>>> Any sort of pointers or tips are welcome!
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>> Vilhelm von Ehrenheim
>>>
>>
>>
>

Reply via email to