-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 14.3k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
core[minor],langchain[minor]: RFC test out indexing abstraction #24145
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎
|
# filtering syntax. | ||
# The syntax is as follows: | ||
# - All operators and comparators should be prefixed with a "$". | ||
# - Field names are expected to be valid identifiers allowing [a-zA-Z0-9_] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
TBD nested fields
filter: Union[Dict[str, Any], List[Dict[str, Any]]], | ||
/, | ||
**kwargs: Any, | ||
) -> Iterable[DeleteResponse]: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
IMO We should probably make this method just return a delete response, and stop worrying about including the ids of deleted content in the delete response as part of this interface. Those IDs aren't that useful and take extra effort to get. It'll also mean that folks don't have to iterate through delete by filter to use it.
""" | ||
|
||
@abc.abstractmethod | ||
def delete_by_ids( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Potentially merge with delete
to avoid introducing another method.
We'd need to update the response type here to just be a bool. We likely don't need counts or IDs anyway
Test out indexing abstraction on parent retriever