Skip to content

Improved feature view and model versioning #2728

Open
6 of 19 issues completed
Open

Description

@adchia

Problem

When using Feast, it can be hard to version features with respect to models in production.

  • Users modifying a re-used feature view (e.g. in response to upstream schema change) can accidentally impact other models in production
  • Hard to tie versions of features together or versions of models (~FeatureService)

As Feast adds batch transformations or #2597, transformation logic will also need to be versioned. This is already an issue today with on demand feature views too.

Potential solution

One way to address this is to double down on:

1. Feature services as the central way to retrieve features + track models.

  • Registering a feature service signifies dependent features / feature views are in "production"
  • Allow feature_service.get_historical_features or feature_service.get_online_features

2. Improvements to feast plan and feast apply

3. Feature view versioning

  • Not super sure here on the best practice, but a way to say that feature view B is a new version of feature view A.

Activity

  1. added
    kind/projectA top level project to be tracked in GitHub Projects
    on May 24, 2022
  2. moved this from Todo to Upcoming in Feast Roadmapon May 24, 2022
  3. moved this from Upcoming to Todo in Feast Roadmapon Sep 2, 2022
  4. stale commented on Sep 22, 2022

    @stale

    This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

  5. Repository owner moved this from Todo to Done in Feast Roadmapon Oct 1, 2022
  6. reopened this on Oct 1, 2022
  7. added and removed
    wontfixThis will not be worked on
    on Oct 1, 2022
  8. 20 remaining items

  9. franciscojavierarceo commented on Mar 29, 2026

    @franciscojavierarceo
    Member

    Keeping this open until all sub issues are closed for online stores.

  10. added a commit that references this issue on Apr 1, 2026
  11. sauravsingla commented on Sep 25, 2026

    @sauravsingla

    A related concern here is behavioral compatibility, not only structural/version compatibility.

    A new feature-view or feature-service version can be schema-compatible and still change downstream model decisions for a meaningful subset of entities. I maintain an open-source project called DeciShift that compares two executable versions of an ML decision system at the final-action level and can attribute differences across features, models, thresholds, policies, and rules.

    One Feast-oriented pattern that seems useful would be:

    FeatureService/version A → model/decision flow A

    vs.

    FeatureService/version B → model/decision flow B

    run on the same entity/evaluation set, followed by checks on action transitions plus global and cohort-level decision-shift thresholds.

    That could complement feast plan / feast apply: those protect the registry/dependency structure, while a downstream behavioral regression check would test whether a seemingly valid feature change actually alters operational decisions unexpectedly.

    If this is useful to the project, I’d be interested in putting together a small public-data Feast + DeciShift example to test the idea.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Type

No type

Projects

Milestone

No milestone

Relationships

None yet

Development

No branches or pull requests

Issue actions