PompousBeetle71 notice that starting with this version when you set model tags they will be stored as user tags , which you can change and edit in UI. So if you still need the system tags you have to access them directly.
Hi PompousBeetle71 , did you upgrade only trains or trains-server as well?
TimelyPenguin76 I see it in the web-app under the model.
AgitatedDove14 You were right. I can get them as system tags.
I've wrote a class that wraps an training session and interaction with trains as upon loading/saving the experiment I need more than just the 'model.bin'
So I use these tags to match a specific aux files that were saved with their model.
PompousBeetle71 I think that was you saw as tags in previous version was actually systems tags, now we also have users tags (i.e. .tags). If you still want to access the system tags can you try:InputModel('aabbcc')._get_base_model().data.system_tags
PompousBeetle71 you can also use ModelOutput.update_weights_package to store multiple files at once (they will all be packaged into a single zip, and unpacked when you get them back via ModelInput). Would that help?
Hi PompousBeetle71 ,
Can you please share with me some more information? Where can you see the tags in the server? Do you mean in the web-app? Do you see the tags under the task or the model?
TimelyPenguin76 the tags names are 'Epoch 1', 'Step 5705'
the return value of the InputModel(<Put a string copy from the UI with the tag id>).tags is an empty array.
AgitatedDove14 My solution actually works better when I want to copy the model + aux to a different s3 folder for deployment as the aux is very light and I can copy the model without downloading it. But thanks for the suggestion.
PompousBeetle71 , Can you try those and tell me if it’s still empty?
` from trains import InputModel
print(InputModel(<Put a string copy from the UI with the tag id>).tags) `I can’t reproduce this issue, and I just want to be sure it’s not a new model
model id can be found like in the pic. after clicking the ID mark
BTW: how are you using them? should we have a direct interface to those ?