Examples: query, "exact match", wildcard*, wild?ard, wild*rd
Fuzzy search: cake~ (finds cakes, bake)
Term boost: "red velvet"^4, chocolate^2
Field grouping: tags:(+work -"fun-stuff")
Escaping: Escape characters +-&|!(){}[]^"~*?:\ with \, e.g. \+
Range search: properties.timestamp:[1587729413488 TO *] (inclusive), properties.title:{A TO Z}(excluding A and Z)
Combinations: chocolate AND vanilla, chocolate OR vanilla, (chocolate OR vanilla) NOT "vanilla pudding"
Field search: properties.title:"The Title" AND text
Answered
Hi! I Am Trying To Provide A Custom

Hi! I am trying to provide a custom output-uri for a task using clearml-task command. In our case it is a path to a data storage, which would be available to a remote agent which will run the task. However, I get an error when executing clearml-task from my local machine:
` ClearML launch - launch any codebase on remote machine running clearml-agent
Creating new task

Error: Insufficient permissions for /path/to/some/storage `I do not have access to that storage from my local machine; is this expected? And can this behavior be circumvented?

  
  
Posted 2 years ago
Votes Newest

Answers 3


Hi PanickyFish98
It verifies it has access to it when actually creating the Task, maybe it should be a warning?!
fyi: you can also change the value from the UI (under Execution output) or have a default one set in the clearml.conf used by the agent

  
  
Posted 2 years ago

Thank you for your reply AgitatedDove14 ; I found the option in clearml.conf ; we will use it for now 🙂 .
But a warning instead of an error would be good. Maybe a bit of a context for our use case: we use clearml-task to create components of a pipeline, we only create tasks and do not schedule them for the execution (so that the pipeline does it instead), so we do not expect the paths for the data storage to be available then. Does this sound like a reasonable workflow, or is there a better way maybe?

  
  
Posted 2 years ago

But a warning instead of an error would be good.

Yes, that makes sense, I'll make sure we do that

Does this sound like a reasonable workflow, or is there a better way maybe?

makes total sense to me, will be part of next RC 🙂

  
  
Posted 2 years ago