model registry: update MLOps diagrams

[tarilabs]

Based on previous feedback from:

• add Model Registry doc to website #3698 (comment)
• add Model Registry doc to website #3698 (comment)

Reorganize diagrams as follows:

1. make MLOps inner Vs outer cycle smaller just to introduce the concept
2. re-use overall architecture diagram for Kubeflow introduced with Implement a Reusable E2E Kubeflow ML Lifecycle #3728
   2.a. use similar style from https://www.kubeflow.org/docs/components/training/overview/#why-training-operator- and adapt to highlight the Model Registry box

Quick demo:

This actualize the agreement from:

• add Model Registry doc to website #3698 (comment)

@StefanoFioravanzo @andreyvelich wdyt ?

[ederign]

I liked the diagram @tarilabs ! /lgtm

[tarilabs]

/hold for review

[StefanoFioravanzo]

@tarilabs Nice diagram! All the components that "push" metadata to the model registry can also "pull" from it. How can we better represent this symmetry? Directional rows may give a wrong representation

[tarilabs]

@tarilabs Nice diagram! All the components that "push" metadata to the model registry can also "pull" from it. How can we better represent this symmetry? Directional rows may give a wrong representation

thanks! I'm starting to followup on received feedback which I didn't have bandwidth to act upon before.

It is a valid comment, even tho I'd say for the most past some components mainly push and occasionally pull (or viceversa) but I concur a bidirectional symmetric arrow might just be good enough, will do 👍

[tarilabs]

@StefanoFioravanzo with 8b3b40e revised as follows:

• "Model Development" bidirectional: I can totally see the interactivity in both directions, especially during "inner loops" iterations
• "Model Serving" the direction was mean to flow from Model Registry, to KServe

I've left the other arrows unchanged, since in those automated components I would expect the components to index/catalog the result into the Model Registry

[rareddy]

/lgtm
/approve

[andreyvelich]

Thank you for adding this @tarilabs, looks great!
/lgtm
/approve

[google-oss-prow]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: andreyvelich, ederign, rareddy

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• content/en/docs/components/model-registry/OWNERS [andreyvelich,ederign,rareddy]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

[tarilabs]

All comments in this PR looks addressed to me,
and socialized this PR with all the folks who had original comments (links in first message) that this PR is meant to follow-up on--as agreed.

/remove-hold