[REVIEW] Biased Random Walks for GNN#1732
[REVIEW] Biased Random Walks for GNN#1732rapids-bot[bot] merged 59 commits intorapidsai:branch-21.10from
Conversation
Merge latest release 0.17
Merge latest branch-0.18
Update forked branch-0.18
Update forked branch-0.18 from release
Update branch-0.19 from release
update forked from release branch-0.19
Merge from release branch-0.19
Merge latest rapidsai:branch-0.19 into aschaffer:branch-0.19
Create forked branch-0.20
merge latest release branch-0.20
Merge latest rapidsai/branch-0.20 into forked branch-0.20
aschaffer/21.08 <- rapidsai/21.08
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## branch-21.10 #1732 +/- ##
===============================================
Coverage ? 59.60%
===============================================
Files ? 77
Lines ? 3533
Branches ? 0
===============================================
Hits ? 2106
Misses ? 1427
Partials ? 0 Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
…ific resources non-copyable to device.
…er vertical traversal performance.
aschaffer
changed the title
| BoolT init{1}; | ||
| return thrust::transform_reduce( | ||
| thrust::device, | ||
| rmm::exec_policy(handle.get_stream_view()), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
So in the below, you're checking only in case if (col_indx > row_indx) {.
Is this sufficient?
Say row_indx is 3. Will this cover the case row_indx, col_indx = (3, 2) exists but (2, 3) missing?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
So, this is an old function, to which I only changed the exec policy to make it compliant to rmm. I'd have to double check.
|
@gpucibot merge |
5 participants
This tracks work on implementing Biased Random Walks for GNN.