Google cloud added the the AI Hub in Beta. Currently in Terraform we can create a Ai Hub model but we can not create Ai Hub jobs, notebook resources.
It's not immediately clear that this would be doable with our standard REST approach - it seems like we'd need to call out to Python, from the docs. That might be hard to package. If this acquires a lot of :+1: we'll consider that - otherwise, we most likely want to stick with REST-accessible resources.
@ndmckinley Thanks! However I'm not very sure what I'm missing But I feel we might be able to manage it via Rest API (i.e. via service: ml.googleapis.com ).
Resource Jobs: Rest API ref
Resource Model: Rest API ref
Resource Model.version: Rest API ref
We could definitely support the REST objects, but to upload the scikit models or tensorflow models, we'd need to call out to python, it seems. I'm talking about the operations described here - those are the ones that would be hard to support. Would the REST objects be useful to you if we didn't have those operations?
Yes It'd be definitely helpful in general sense. The way I understand it,
tensorflow_model.pbor simple_model.pkl). Now any custom python module used in the process is generally not part of infra and should not be a responsibility of Terraform.packageUris[] in projects.models.versions is separate and should not be a part of Infra itself.I'd be happy to help with this feature
Awesome, all yours! Let us know if we can be of any support here. :)
It looks like magic modules already has the definition for models and model versions, which means it's technically possible to publish new versions.
So what's missing? Is it only a question of generating the terraform provider?
We can always create new model+version. We can not create Jobs, Notebooks etc.
manage it via Rest API (i.e. via service: ml.googleapis.com ).
Resource Jobs: Rest API ref
Resource Model: Rest API ref
Resource Model.version: Rest API ref
Ah, OK.
It also looks like jobs are on the way:
https://github.com/GoogleCloudPlatform/magic-modules/pull/2565
Most helpful comment
It's not immediately clear that this would be doable with our standard REST approach - it seems like we'd need to call out to Python, from the docs. That might be hard to package. If this acquires a lot of :+1: we'll consider that - otherwise, we most likely want to stick with REST-accessible resources.