hamilton VS orchest

And find the repository here: https://github.com/dagworks-inc/hamilton/

Python - https://github.com/stitchfix/hamilton (author here). It's great if you want your code to be always unit testable and documentation friendly, and you want to be able to visualize execution. Blog post on using it with Pandas https://link.medium.com/XhyYD9BAntb.

Yes! As one of the creators of https://github.com/stitchfix/hamilton this was one of the aims. Simplifying the cognitive burden for those developing and managing data transforms over the course of years, and in particular for ones they didn't write!

For example in Hamilton -- we force people to write "declarative functions" which then are stitched together to create a dataflow.

E.g. example function -- my guess is that you can read and understand/guess what it does very easily.

For (1) there are quite a few options - prefect is one, metaflow is another, airflow, dagster, even https://github.com/stitchfix/hamilton (core contributor here), etc.

If you're want to do more python https://github.com/stitchfix/hamilton allows you to model dependencies at a columnar (field) level.

Take a look at https://github.com/stitchfix/hamilton - we're after contributors who can help us grow the project, e.g. make documentation great, dog fooding features and suggesting/contributing usability improvements.

For a real world example of their power, we built an entire framework (https://github.com/stitchfix/hamilton) at Stitch Fix, where a lot of cool magic is provide via decorators - see https://hamilton-docs.gitbook.io/docs/reference/api-reference/available-decorators and these two source files (https://github.com/stitchfix/hamilton/blob/main/hamilton/function_modifiers_base.py, https://github.com/stitchfix/hamilton/blob/main/hamilton/function_modifiers.py ). Note we do some non-trivial stuff via them.

For data processing/transform code, I would recommend looking at https://github.com/stitchfix/hamilton, especially if you're trying to test pandas code. Short getting started here - https://towardsdatascience.com/how-to-use-hamilton-with-pandas-in-5-minutes-89f63e5af8f5 (disclaimer: I'm one of the authors).

The python package, hamilton, from Stitch Fix (https://hamilton-docs.gitbook.io/docs/) can help manage transformations on pandas dataframes. This DAG of transformations is managed separately in a file - so it can be versioned, in case the transformations change. The memory required is reduced, because only the API call tables and mapping parameter table have to be in memory. The calculated columns can be produced as needed. Just like dbt, transformations are separate from the source tables - but hamilton can be used on any python object - not just dataframes. dbt is SQL based.

You can check out our OSS https://github.com/orchest/orchest

The code example is part of our ELT/data pipeline tool called Orchest: https://github.com/orchest/orchest/

First want to say congrats to the Patterns team for creating a gorgeous looking tool. Very minimal and approachable. Massive kudos!

Disclaimer: we're building something very similar and I'm curious about a couple of things.

One of the questions our users have asked us often is how to minimize the dependence on "product specific" components/nodes/steps. For example, if you write CI for GitHub Actions you may use a bunch of GitHub Action references.

Looking at the `graph.yml` in some of the examples you shared you use a similar approach (e.g. patterns/openai-completion@v4). That means that whenever you depend on such components your automation/data pipeline becomes more tied to the specific tool (GitHub Actions/Patterns), effectively locking in users.

How are you helping users feel comfortable with that problem (I don't want to invest in something that's not portable)? It's something we've struggled with ourselves as we're expanding the "out of the box" capabilities you get.

Furthermore, would have loved to see this as an open source project. But I guess the second best thing to open source is some open source contributions and `dcp` and `common-model` look quite interesting!

For those who are curious, I'm one of the authors of https://github.com/orchest/orchest

Haven't tried it. In its favor, Argo is vendor neutral and is really easy to set up in a local k8s environment like docker for desktop or minikube. If you already use k8s for configuration, service discovery, secret management, etc, it's dead simple to set up and use (avoiding configuration having to learn a whole new workflow configuration language in addition to k8s). The big downside is that it doesn't have a visual DAG editor (although that might be a positive for engineers having to fix workflows written by non-programmers), but the relatively bare-metal nature of Argo means that it's fairly easy to use it as an underlying engine for a more opinionated or lower-code framework (orchest is a notable one out now).

If you’d like to try something for you data workflows that’s vendor agnostic (k8s based) and open source you can check out our project: https://github.com/orchest/orchest

You can find it here: https://github.com/orchest/orchest Convenience install script: https://github.com/orchest/orchest#installation

We automatically provide container level parallelism in Orchest: https://github.com/orchest/orchest

For people in this thread interested in what this tool is an alternative to: Airflow, Luigi, Kubeflow, Kedro, Flyte, Metaflow, Sagemaker Pipelines, GCP Vertex Workbench, Azure Data Factory, Azure ML, Dagster, DVC, ClearML, Prefect, Pachyderm, and Orchest.

Disclaimer: author of Orchest https://github.com/orchest/orchest