Adding support for serverless, reacting to api changes, adding tests #108
Conversation
- Moving to new global API - Adding tests - Minor API fixes to more accurately reflect the API spec Fixes neon-sunset#91 Fixes neon-sunset#107 Lot of breaking changes here - there are significant differences between old and new APIs, also pod vs serverless Tests are mainly using serverless, since at the time of writing free pod based offering is broken (indexes won't initialize) NOT TESTED / OUTSTANDING ISSUES: collection operations - serverless doesn't support collections, pod based gcp-starter is currently broken (does it support collections) - create collection from index - restore index from collection - list collections (when there is something in them) metadata filtering on non-query operations - upsert, set metadata - delete vectors based on filter complex metadata operations (see https://docs.pinecone.io/guides/data/filtering-with-metadata#metadata-query-language) sparse vectors use legacy CreateIndex - environment is no longer part of PineconeClient definition, for now storing the value if legacy ctor was called. Also, where to get pods and pod_type?
|
still work in progress - I focused on serverless and that works pretty well, but I have no way currently to test if/how much is broken for the pod based indexes. Since the latest update gcp-starter has been broken. |
|
Thank you for the contribution!
I had initial sketch of porting to the "new API", that is, the way it looked at the moment of introduction of serverless but ran into similar issues with only the old way working with pods and only the new way working with serverless, as well as billing issues. It was also possible in the past to get plain OpenAPI schema from the documentation page but they changed the way it worked and I could no longer manage to extract it or find in the published official SDKs at the time. That and switching over from a side project tool I wrote that used to rely on Pinecone (hence no tests - the tool pretty much exercised all paths so running sample workloads gave high coverage immediately) led me to ultimately putting this project on the back burner. Definitely happy to see interest still, if there is anything I can help with to get this done - please let me know. |
|
Thanks for a quick reply! According to the new blog post, new API should work across all environments now. But I will make sure once gcp starter issue is fixed on their end. Let me know if the general approach makes sense and is consistent with your design. My background is in databases and ORMs so this is all pretty new to me, but I'm interested in spending some time to improve the SDK. |
This comment was marked as off-topic.
This comment was marked as off-topic.
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
@maumar Thank you for working on this! Let me know if you are done so I can review this in full (i.e. look at API changes at Pinecone's side and etc.). On tests dependent on API key - I think it's ok for them to fail for the time being, I'll look into getting a separate account for test environment. |
|
@neon-sunset I am close to being done. Probably good for a thorough review tomorrow, but will ping you again after I push the final changes. |
…s, reacting to initial CR feedback
neon-sunset
force-pushed
the
serverless_support
branch
from
c6f0a34
to
366bd82
Compare
|
I added a few changes to make CI pass (if it's green, surely everything is OK, right? 😅), make F# example correct, and remove the remaining warnings (AOT-compatibility analysis for test projects is not needed, and most of them would be doing very AOT unfriendly things anyway). All tests are for now skipped - will look into setting up a test env account as mentioned earlier. |
|
Do you guys have an ETA on when this will make it into nuget? I have this branch running locally and it works great. |
|
@spppaul this is a community-maintained library (and I'm happy this is now actually a community, with Maurycy's and Andrii's contributions!) licensed under MIT. As with many other FOSS projects, the releases and features delivered are the result of work done by contributors in their spare time and are not subject to SLA or specific ETAs that can be committed to. This PR will likely be merged "soon(tm)" but there is no guarantee or promise to be made as this is not a commercial project bound by a contract. |
I understand completely and thank you! Just letting you know this little gem you're working on is pretty much the only solution for not doing raw REST calls to serverless Pinecone in .NET. If I can't get it in nuget by next week I guess I'll just have to commit my local Pinecone .NET DLL to our repo and spend all day in meetings explaining it :) |
|
@maumar tests are failing as the secret is not accessible - GH prevents its leakage for PRs originating from users without secrets write access. It should work once merged. When ran locally, it appears that currently index is being concurrently deleted from multiple locations. I added a dirty-ish workaround for this to just ignore the exceptions if Pinecone responded with I can see there are a few places where you intended to add more changes but hopefully git pull will run without you having to resolve any conflicts. Given that it works as is (especially via gRPC), there is no outstanding feedback other than the comments above. The tests are quite a bit more complicated than I'm used to (mostly because my domain of work is low-level and there it's either ad-host/flat structure or bespoke reproduction code for complex scenarios), but I don't really have an opinion on that, if anything, it's useful to learn from those. Make sure to add yourself to the list of authors in csproj :) |
…ing test coverage for query with complex metadata
|
@neon-sunset thanks for the review and code fixes! I have just pushed in the final set of changes, so from my perspective the PR should be good to go. Wrt test complexity - some of it stems from the fact that Pinecone doesn't have a good (any?) local testing story. My understanding is that it is an outlier - pretty much any other vector DB has a test container available: https://testcontainers.com/modules/ Hopefully Pinecone has something in the works as well, and in the future tests can be made much simpler and more robust. |
test: clear indexes in parallel test: guard against delete called on an already deleted index in one more place docs: generate XML documentation docs: fix VS Code config for C# example docs: make C# example publish AOT
|
@spppaul @maumar 2.0 version has been pushed to Nuget https://www.nuget.org/packages/Pinecone.NET/2.0.0 Let me know if something breaks. |
I removed my local reference and used the 2.0 nuget package and it seemed to work the same, thanks! |
Fixes #91
Fixes #107
Lot of breaking changes here - there are significant differences between old and new APIs, also pod vs serverless Tests run against both pod and serverless using the free plan. Functionality not available in this plan has not been tested.
NOT TESTED (requires paid plan):