@<1523701087100473344:profile|SuccessfulKoala55> yes I am 🙂 And thanks, looking forward to it!

We’re on the PRO 🙂

Thanks @<1523703436166565888:profile|DeterminedCrab71> . Yes, I've seen the three options to plot different things. What I'm trying to do is for the "Iterations" plot to have the same plot but just change the X label, not the time series. In matplotlib that would be a call to xlabel .

The problem with logging as a 2D plot is we lose the streaming: if I understand correctly the documentation, Logger.current_logger().report_scatter2d logs a single, frozen 2D plot when you know the full X and Y data. And you would do that at each evaluation step.
Logging scalars allows to log a growing time series, i.e. add to the existing series/plot at every "iteration", thus being able to monitor the progress over time in one single plot. It's a much more logical setting.

Great, thanks both! I suspect this might need an extra option to be passed via the SDK, to save the iteration scaling at logging time, which the UI can then use at rendering time.

Thanks. That would be very helpful. Some of our graphs are logged by optimization steps, whereas some by epochs, so having all called "Iterations" is not ideal.

(do you welcome PRs?)

Yes, exactly. Here is the logical sense it makes: I have plots where iterations represent different units: for some these plots iterations (call them A) are optimization steps, while for others (call them B) they are evaluation iterations, occuring every N optimization steps. I would like to either:

• Change the X label so these different plots do not have the same label when they represent different things.
• Or, even better, keep the unique "iterations" label but be able to change how I lo...

Happy to jump on a call if easier to make sense of it :)

What is the best way to achieve that please?

(actually, that might even be feasible without touching the UI, depending how the plot is rendered, but I'll check)

Does that make sense?

@<1523701070390366208:profile|CostlyOstrich36> Any idea please? We could use our 8xA100 as 8 workers, for 8 single-gpu jobs running faster than on a single 1xV100 each.

Can the “multiple agents on a single queue” scenario, combined with the autoscaler, spawn multiple agents on a single EC2 instance, by chance, please? (thinking e.g. 8 agents on a 8xGPU machine)

Thanks @<1523701070390366208:profile|CostlyOstrich36> !

• I hadn’t found the multiple-resources within the same autoscaler. Could you point me to the right place please? Are they all used interexchangeably based upon availability, rather than based on job needs?
• We thought of using separate queues (we do that for CPU vs GPU queues), but having ClearML automatically dispatch to the right based on a job specification would be more flexible. (for example, we could then think to dispath dynami...

OK, so no way to have an automatic dispatch to different, correctly-sized instances, it’s only achievable by submitting to different queues?