-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 85
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
Feature/dynamic rag support #1377
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
…enerate` methods
…ient into feature/dynamic-rag-support
Great to see you again! Thanks for the contribution. |
…g on LLM performance
…ient into feature/dynamic-rag-support
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.
Looks nice!
temperature=temperature, | ||
top_p=top_p, | ||
is_azure=is_azure or False, | ||
) |
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.
should we have a "custom" method? 🤔 Mainly thinking about the generative-dummy module
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.
The problem with a custom provider is the strong typing of the protobuf message. I think it would work if we had some parsing on the server-side to handle a JSON object but since we don't have that it wouldn't be useful at this stage. I think adding a dummy
method would make sense
temperature=temperature, | ||
top_p=top_p, | ||
is_azure=is_azure or False, | ||
) |
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.
How would you implement image/video generation for an existing provider? XXX_image(...)?
…ient into feature/dynamic-rag-support
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.
Orca Security Scan Summary
Status | Check | Issues by priority | |
---|---|---|---|
![]() |
Infrastructure as Code | ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
View in Orca |
![]() |
SAST | ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
View in Orca |
![]() |
Secrets | ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
View in Orca |
![]() |
Vulnerabilities | ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
View in Orca |
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #1377 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 88.25% 88.19% -0.07%
==========================================
Files 186 187 +1
Lines 15875 16098 +223
==========================================
+ Hits 14011 14198 +187
- Misses 1864 1900 +36 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
No description provided.