and this works. However, without the trick from UnevenDolphin73 , the following won’t work (return None):
if __name__ == "__main__": task = Task.current_task() task.connect(config) run() from clearml import Task Task.init()

AgitatedDove14 , my “uncommitted changes” ends with
... if __name__ == "__main__": task = clearml.Task.get_task(clearml.config.get_remote_task_id()) task.connect(config) run() from clearml import Task Task.init()

pip install git+ https://github.com/allegroai/clearml.git
out 🙂

JitteryCoyote63 yes exactly, sorry, I forgot to add the Task.get_task in my response. That's exactly what we do 😅

The task object

JitteryCoyote63

Should be added before the 

if name == "main":

?

Yes, it should.
From you code I understand it is not ?
What's the clearml version you are using ?

So I guess the problem is that the following snippet:
from clearml import Task Task.init()Should be added before the if __name__ == "__main__": ?

Do you want the task object or the task id?

AgitatedDove14 So I copied pasted locally the https://github.com/pytorch-ignite/examples/blob/main/tutorials/intermediate/cifar10-distributed.py from the examples of pytorch-ignite. Then I added a requirements.txt and called clearml-task to run it on one of my agents. I adapted a bit the script (removed python-fire since it’s not yet supported by clearml).

The Task.init is called at a later stage of the process, so I think this relates again to the whole setup process we've been discussing both here and in #340... I promise to try ;)

UnevenDolphin73 , task = clearml.Task.get_task(clearml.config.get_remote_task_id()) worked, thanks

I remember there were some issues with it ...

I hope not 😞 Anyhow the only thing that does matter is the auto_connect arguments (meaning if you want to disable some, you should pass them when calling Task.init)

JitteryCoyote63 fix should be pushed later today 🙂
Meanwhile you can manually add the Task.init() call to the original script at the top, it is basically the same 🙂

AgitatedDove14 yeah I see this now; this was an issue because I later had to "disconnect" the remote task, so it can, itself, create new tasks (using clearml.config.remote.override_current_task_id(None) ). I guess you might remember that discussion? 😁

EDIT: It's the discussion we had here, for reference. https://clearml.slack.com/archives/CTK20V944/p1640955599257500?thread_ts=1640867211.238900&cid=CTK20V944
So probably not needed in JitteryCoyote63 's case, we still have some use case for it.

AgitatedDove14 So I’ll just replace task = clearml.Task.get_task(clearml.config.get_remote_task_id()) with Task.init() and wait for your fix 🙂

BTW: UnevenDolphin73 you should never actually do "task = clearml.Task.get_task(clearml.config.get_remote_task_id())"
You should just do " Task.init() " it will automatically take the "get_remote_task_id" and do all sorts of internal setups, you will end up with the same object but in an ordered fashion

Yes even without any arguments give to Task.init() , it has everything from the server

JitteryCoyote63 I think I found the bug in clearml-task it adds it at the end instead of before everything else

AgitatedDove14 I will try! I remember there were some issues with it, where I had to resort to this method first, but maybe things have changed since :)

JitteryCoyote63 I use clearml.config.get_remote_task_id()

JitteryCoyote63 Are you calling clearml-task with --skip-task-init ?

JitteryCoyote63 no you should not (unless you already have the Task.init call in your code)
clearml-data add the Task.init call at the beginning of the code in the entry point.
This means you should be able to get Task.current_task() and get back the object.
What do you have under the "uncommitted changes" on the Task that was created?

UnevenDolphin73 clearml.config.get_remote_task_id() will return the Task ID not the Task object. in order to get automagic to work, one has to call Task.init() . When executed by the agent, Task.init() will take the arguments from the Task definition on the server (it will ignore task_name, project_name etc arguments passed to the task.init call) , and apply all the patching to the different frameworks. Make sense?

AgitatedDove14 No, should I?