feat(indexing): enhance search, chunking and file watching #1

ErikBjare · 2024-12-11T15:54:22Z

Major improvements to indexing and search functionality:

Add scoring explanations and custom weights
Improve document chunking with better overlap handling
Enhance file watching reliability
Add debug features and logging
Improve test coverage and error handling

Important

Enhances indexing and search with scoring explanations, improved chunking, reliable file watching, and better test coverage.

Behavior:
- Adds scoring explanations and custom weights to Indexer.search().
- Improves document chunking with better overlap handling in document_processor.py.
- Enhances file watching reliability in watcher.py.
- Adds debug features and logging in indexer.py and watcher.py.
CLI:
- Updates cli.py to support new search options like scoring explanations and custom weights.
Tests:
- Improves test coverage for chunking, indexing, and file watching in test_chunking.py, test_indexing.py, and test_watcher.py.
Misc:
- Adds typecheck command to Makefile.
- Updates example scripts to reflect changes in search API.

^{This description was created by}^{for a4a63d0. It will automatically update as commits are pushed.}

Major improvements to indexing and search functionality: - Add scoring explanations and custom weights - Improve document chunking with better overlap handling - Enhance file watching reliability - Add debug features and logging - Improve test coverage and error handling Co-authored-by: Bob <[email protected]>

ellipsis-dev

❌ Changes requested. Reviewed everything up to a1843c3 in 2 minutes and 18 seconds

More details

Looked at 1501 lines of code in 13 files
Skipped 1 files when reviewing.
Skipped posting 0 drafted comments based on config settings.

Workflow ID: wflow_N9D9GylvlYY6OX61

Want Ellipsis to fix these issues? Tag @ellipsis-dev in a comment. You can customize Ellipsis with 👍 / 👎 feedback, review rules, user-specific overrides, quiet mode, and more.

gptme_rag/indexing/indexer.py

Major improvements to indexing and file watching systems: - Refactor search functionality in indexer - Add dedicated methods for result grouping and scoring - Improve code organization and readability - Better handling of chunk grouping - Enhance file watcher reliability - Add robust error handling and retries - Improve file processing logic - Better logging for debugging - Improve test stability - Use unique collection names per test - Add better assertions and timeouts - More reliable test cleanup Co-authored-by: Bob <[email protected]>

ellipsis-dev

❌ Changes requested. Incremental review on 95b6585 in 48 seconds

More details

Looked at 808 lines of code in 5 files
Skipped 0 files when reviewing.
Skipped posting 3 drafted comments based on config settings.

1. gptme_rag/indexing/watcher.py:68

Draft comment:
Using time.sleep to wait for file writes can be unreliable. Consider implementing a more robust method to ensure the file is fully written, such as checking file size stability over a short period.
Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required: 50%
The _queue_update method in watcher.py directly calls time.sleep to wait for the file to be fully written. This could be improved by using a more robust method to ensure the file is ready, such as checking file size stability over a short period.

2. gptme_rag/indexing/watcher.py:218

Draft comment:
Consider making the initial wait time for exponential backoff configurable to allow flexibility in different environments.
Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required: 30%
In watcher.py, the _update_index_with_retries method uses exponential backoff for retries, but the initial wait time is hardcoded. It might be beneficial to make this configurable for flexibility in different environments.

3. tests/test_indexing.py:78

Draft comment:
Ensure that the collection is reset before each test that modifies the index to maintain a clean state. This is done here but should be consistent across all relevant tests.
Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required: 20%
In test_indexing.py, the test_indexer_add_documents function includes a reset of the collection before adding documents. This is a good practice to ensure a clean state, but it should be consistently applied across all tests that modify the index.

Workflow ID: wflow_rKmO5ZLJTHWJmxRk

Want Ellipsis to fix these issues? Tag @ellipsis-dev in a comment. You can customize Ellipsis with 👍 / 👎 feedback, review rules, user-specific overrides, quiet mode, and more.

gptme_rag/indexing/indexer.py

codecov-commenter · 2024-12-11T16:29:26Z

Welcome to Codecov 🎉

Once you merge this PR into your default branch, you're all set! Codecov will compare coverage reports and display results in all future pull requests.

Thanks for integrating Codecov - We've got you covered ☂️

- Add shared indexer fixture with automatic cleanup - Add cleanup_chroma fixture to reset ChromaDB between tests - Refactor test files to use shared fixtures - Remove duplicated setup code - Use tmp_path fixture instead of custom temp_dir Co-authored-by: Bob <[email protected]>

ellipsis-dev

👍 Looks good to me! Incremental review on d79047d in 29 seconds

More details

Looked at 573 lines of code in 4 files
Skipped 0 files when reviewing.
Skipped posting 8 drafted comments based on config settings.

1. tests/test_chunking.py:54

Draft comment:
Using print statements for debugging in tests is not recommended. Consider using logging or assertions to verify test conditions.
Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required: 50%
The use of print statements for debugging in tests is not a best practice. It is better to use logging or assertions to verify test conditions.

2. tests/test_chunking.py:56

Draft comment:
Using print statements for debugging in tests is not recommended. Consider using logging or assertions to verify test conditions.
Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required: 50%
The use of print statements for debugging in tests is not a best practice. It is better to use logging or assertions to verify test conditions.

3. tests/test_chunking.py:58

Draft comment:
Using print statements for debugging in tests is not recommended. Consider using logging or assertions to verify test conditions.
Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required: 50%
The use of print statements for debugging in tests is not a best practice. It is better to use logging or assertions to verify test conditions.

4. tests/test_chunking.py:61

Draft comment:
Using print statements for debugging in tests is not recommended. Consider using logging or assertions to verify test conditions.
Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required: 50%
The use of print statements for debugging in tests is not a best practice. It is better to use logging or assertions to verify test conditions.

5. tests/test_chunking.py:63

Draft comment:
Using print statements for debugging in tests is not recommended. Consider using logging or assertions to verify test conditions.
Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required: 50%
The use of print statements for debugging in tests is not a best practice. It is better to use logging or assertions to verify test conditions.

6. tests/test_chunking.py:66

Draft comment:
Using print statements for debugging in tests is not recommended. Consider using logging or assertions to verify test conditions.
Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required: 50%
The use of print statements for debugging in tests is not a best practice. It is better to use logging or assertions to verify test conditions.

7. tests/test_chunking.py:70

Draft comment:
Using print statements for debugging in tests is not recommended. Consider using logging or assertions to verify test conditions.
Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required: 50%
The use of print statements for debugging in tests is not a best practice. It is better to use logging or assertions to verify test conditions.

8. tests/test_chunking.py:72

Draft comment:
Using print statements for debugging in tests is not recommended. Consider using logging or assertions to verify test conditions.
Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required: 50%
The use of print statements for debugging in tests is not a best practice. It is better to use logging or assertions to verify test conditions.

Workflow ID: wflow_Aj1IjtJ2rW0dg7N6

You can customize Ellipsis with 👍 / 👎 feedback, review rules, user-specific overrides, quiet mode, and more.

Replace debug print statements with proper logging in indexer. Clean up test files by removing debug prints and improving assertions. Add more descriptive error messages in tests. Co-authored-by: Bob <[email protected]>

ellipsis-dev

👍 Looks good to me! Incremental review on 77fbd13 in 25 seconds

More details

Looked at 198 lines of code in 4 files
Skipped 0 files when reviewing.
Skipped posting 2 drafted comments based on config settings.

1. tests/test_chunking.py:108

Draft comment:
Consider replacing print statements with logging for consistency and better control over output. This applies to other test files as well.
Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required: 50%
The PR description mentions removing print statements and adding logging. The test files still contain print statements, which should be replaced with logging for consistency and better control over output.

2. tests/test_document_processor.py:95

Draft comment:
Consider replacing print statements with logging for consistency and better control over output. This applies to other test files as well.
Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required: 50%
The PR description mentions removing print statements and adding logging. The test files still contain print statements, which should be replaced with logging for consistency and better control over output.

Workflow ID: wflow_OW32mc6LKAHWMenl

You can customize Ellipsis with 👍 / 👎 feedback, review rules, user-specific overrides, quiet mode, and more.

ellipsis-dev

👍 Looks good to me! Incremental review on 7f59ae2 in 20 seconds

More details

Looked at 65 lines of code in 1 files
Skipped 0 files when reviewing.
Skipped posting 0 drafted comments based on config settings.

Workflow ID: wflow_Zn6mz4NUZ3Qm2xMM

You can customize Ellipsis with 👍 / 👎 feedback, review rules, user-specific overrides, quiet mode, and more.

- Add progress bar using tqdm for document indexing - Refactor document collection and processing for better efficiency - Improve error handling and logging - Add JSON support for scoring weights - Split indexing into collection and processing phases Co-authored-by: Bob <[email protected]>

ellipsis-dev

👍 Looks good to me! Incremental review on a4a63d0 in 1 minute and 1 seconds

More details

Looked at 430 lines of code in 3 files
Skipped 1 files when reviewing.
Skipped posting 3 drafted comments based on config settings.

1. gptme_rag/cli.py:138

Draft comment:
Redundant import of json. It's already imported at the top of the file. Remove this import to clean up the code.
Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required: 50%
The import of json in cli.py is redundant as it is already imported at the top of the file. This should be removed to clean up the code.

2. gptme_rag/indexing/indexer.py:178

Draft comment:
Converting the generator add_documents_progress to a list is unnecessary and can be removed to improve performance.
Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required: 50%
The add_documents method in indexer.py calls add_documents_progress and converts its result to a list, which is unnecessary since add_documents_progress is a generator. This conversion should be removed to improve performance.

3. gptme_rag/indexing/indexer.py:859

Draft comment:
The condition should be > instead of >= when checking if the file limit is reached. This ensures the warning is only logged when the limit is actually exceeded.
Reason this comment was not posted:
Confidence changes required: 50%
In indexer.py, the _get_valid_files method checks if the number of valid files is greater than or equal to the file limit, but the warning message suggests the limit is already reached. The condition should be > instead of >=. This applies to the _get_valid_files method.

Workflow ID: wflow_Ai5mijsS4NPLuRsw

You can customize Ellipsis with 👍 / 👎 feedback, review rules, user-specific overrides, quiet mode, and more.

ellipsis-dev bot reviewed Dec 11, 2024

View reviewed changes

gptme_rag/indexing/indexer.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

ellipsis-dev bot reviewed Dec 11, 2024

View reviewed changes

refactor: improve logging and test clarity

77fbd13

Replace debug print statements with proper logging in indexer. Clean up test files by removing debug prints and improving assertions. Add more descriptive error messages in tests. Co-authored-by: Bob <[email protected]>

ellipsis-dev bot reviewed Dec 11, 2024

View reviewed changes

fix: removed unused function

7f59ae2

ellipsis-dev bot reviewed Dec 11, 2024

View reviewed changes

ErikBjare merged commit 18ba7cb into master Dec 11, 2024
1 check passed

ErikBjare deleted the dev/lots-of-improvements branch December 11, 2024 17:19

feat(indexing): enhance search, chunking and file watching #1

feat(indexing): enhance search, chunking and file watching #1

Uh oh!

Conversation

ErikBjare commented Dec 11, 2024 • edited by ellipsis-dev bot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

ellipsis-dev bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

ellipsis-dev bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

codecov-commenter commented Dec 11, 2024

Welcome to Codecov 🎉

Uh oh!

ellipsis-dev bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

ellipsis-dev bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

ellipsis-dev bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

ellipsis-dev bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

ErikBjare commented Dec 11, 2024 •

edited by ellipsis-dev bot

Loading