ploomber VS argo

- One-click sharing powered by Ploomber Cloud: https://ploomber.io

Documentation: https://jupysql.ploomber.io

Note that JupySQL is a fork of ipython-sql; which is no longer actively developed. Catherine, ipython-sql's creator, was kind enough to pass the project to us (check out ipython-sql's README).

We'd love to learn what you think and what features we can ship for JupySQL to be the best SQL client! Please let us know in the comments!

For those who don't know, Jupyter has a bash kernel: https://github.com/takluyver/bash_kernel

And you can run Jupyter notebooks from the CLI with Ploomber: https://github.com/ploomber/ploomber

Develop notebook-based pipelines

Fair point. MLflow has a lot of features to cover the end-to-end dev cycle. This SQLite tracker only covers the experiment tracking part.

We have another project to cover the orchestration/pipelines aspect: https://github.com/ploomber/ploomber and we have plans to work on the rest of features. For now, we're focusing on those two.

I recommend taking a look at the ploomber open source. It helps you structure your code and parameterize it in a way that's easier to maintain and test. Our blog has lots of resources about it from testing your code to building a data science platform on AWS.

Developing end-to-end data science infrastructure can get complex. For example, many of us might have struggled to try to integrate AWS services and deal with configuration, permissions, etc. At Ploomber, we’ve worked with many companies in a wide range of industries, such as energy, entertainment, computational chemistry, and genomics, so we are constantly looking for simple solutions to get them started with Data Science in the cloud.

If you like working locally with notebooks, you can run via the free tier of ploomber, that'll allow you to get the Ram/Compute you need for the bigger models as part of the free tier. Also, it has the historical executions so you don't need to remember what you executed an hour later!

It really depends on your use cases, I've seen a lot of those tools that lock you into a certain syntax, framework or weird language (for instance Groovy). If you'd like to use core python or Jupyter notebooks I'd recommend Ploomber, the community support is really strong, there's an emphasis on observability and you can deploy it on any executor like Slurm, AWS Batch or Airflow. In addition, there's a free managed compute (cloud edition) where you can run certain bioinformatics flows like Alphafold or Cripresso2

That's what we do for lineage with https://ploomber.io/

Like Argo Workflows?

https://github.com/argoproj/argo-workflows

Dagger looks more comparable to Argo Workflows: https://argoproj.github.io/argo-workflows/ That's the first of the Argo projects, which can run multi-step workflows within containers on Kubernetes.

For what it's worth, my colleagues and I have had great luck with Argo Workflows and wrote up a blog post about some of its advantages a few years ago: https://www.interline.io/blog/scaling-openstreetmap-data-wor...

Despite other alternatives like Circle CI, Travis CI, GitLab CI or even self-hosted options using open-source projects like Tekton or Argo Workflow, the reason for choosing GitHub Actions was straightforward: GitHub Actions, in conjunction with the GitHub ecosystem, offers a user-friendly experience and access to a rich software marketplace.

author seems to be describing the kind of patterns you might make with https://argoproj.github.io/argo-workflows/ . or see for example https://github.com/couler-proj/couler , which is an sdk for describing tasks that may be submitted to different workflow engines on the backend.

it's a little confusing to me that the author seems to object to "pipelines" and then equate them with messaging-queues. for me at least, "pipeline" vs "workflow-engine" vs "scheduler" are all basically synonyms in this context. those things may or may not be implemented with a message-queue for persistence, but the persistence layer itself is usually below the level of abstraction that $current_problem is really concerned with. like the author says, eventually you have to track state/timestamps/logs, but you get that from the beginning if you start with a workflow engine.

i agree with author that message-queues should not be a knee-jerk response to most problems because the LoE for edge-cases/observability/monitoring is huge. (maybe reach for a queue only if you may actually overwhelm whatever the "scheduler" can handle.) but don't build the scheduler from scratch either.. use argowf, kubeflow, or a more opinionated framework like airflow, mlflow, databricks, aws lamda or step-functions. all/any of these should have config or api that's robust enough to express rate-limit/retry stuff. almost any of these choices has better observability out-of-the-box than you can easily get from a queue. but most importantly.. they provide idioms for handling failure that data-science folks and junior devs can work with. the right way to structure code is just much more clear and things like structuring messages/events, subclassing workers, repeating/retrying tasks, is just harder to mess up.

Argo Workflows + Argo Events

Drone, or Tekton, Argo Workflows if you’re on k8s

Check out Argo Workflows.

go-git has a lot of bugs and is not actively maintained. The bug even affects Argo Workflow, which caused our data pipeline to fail unexpectedly (reference: https://github.com/argoproj/argo-workflows/issues/10091)