Skip to content
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

[ENH]: CLI optional parameter to turn off persistent mode #2225

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

nepeee
Copy link

@nepeee nepeee commented May 17, 2024

Refs: #1674

Description of changes

Summarize the changes made by this PR.

  • Improvements & Bug fixes
    • Added optional persistent paramter to CLI.

Test plan

How are these changes tested?
Tested locally with --persistent, --no-persistent and without the parameter

Documentation Changes

TBD

Copy link

vercel bot commented May 17, 2024

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎

Name Status Preview Comments Updated (UTC)
chroma ✅ Ready (Inspect) Visit Preview 💬 Add feedback May 19, 2024 5:45pm

Copy link

Reviewer Checklist

Please leverage this checklist to ensure your code review is thorough before approving

Testing, Bugs, Errors, Logs, Documentation

  • Can you think of any use case in which the code does not behave as intended? Have they been tested?
  • Can you think of any inputs or external events that could break the code? Is user input validated and safe? Have they been tested?
  • If appropriate, are there adequate property based tests?
  • If appropriate, are there adequate unit tests?
  • Should any logging, debugging, tracing information be added or removed?
  • Are error messages user-friendly?
  • Have all documentation changes needed been made?
  • Have all non-obvious changes been commented?

System Compatibility

  • Are there any potential impacts on other parts of the system or backward compatibility?
  • Does this change intersect with any items on our roadmap, and if so, is there a plan for fitting them together?

Quality

  • Is this code of a unexpectedly high quality (Readability, Modularity, Intuitiveness)

Copy link
Contributor

@tazarov tazarov left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think there's room for improvement and we should explore additional alternatives (not only the one I propose in my comments).

@@ -31,6 +31,9 @@ def run(
path: str = typer.Option(
"./chroma_data", help="The path to the file or directory."
),
persistent: Annotated[
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think this would be confusing at best. Wouldn't it be more appropriate not to set --path?

Imagine chroma run --path <path> --persistent False.

In the above, --path is still mandatory, which wouldn't help much either.

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I done it so that it wont brake compatibility. There is a chance that some people running it without providing the path parameter so that it defaults to "./chroma_data".

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The path param is optional you can run it by just chroma run

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hmm, or you mean throwing an error if the user sets the path parameter?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Fair point but I still feel that

chroma run --path ./chroma --no-persistent

can be confusing.

I think that from CLI perspective having less flags is better than more. And introducing a breaking change to have no path translate to ephemeral instance. The absence of something can be a better mechanic than default to something the user might not expect.

The CLI is still nascent so we might not want to be overzealous on backward compatibility of defaults. I don't think we have telemetry on how frequently or not people are using the CLI to run Chroma so it might be a shot in the dark.

@jeffchuber any thoughts on this?

chromadb/cli/cli.py Show resolved Hide resolved
@jeffchuber
Copy link
Contributor

@nepeee can you tell me more about the use case here? what is the use case to run the server, but not need persistence?

@nepeee
Copy link
Author

nepeee commented May 23, 2024

I use chroma for real time text grouping. Basically i push messages to the db and query the similar ones to group them for analysis. I don't need persistence because there's no reason to save the data and i want the lowest latency possible.

I like the server because i can work on my code while the cli server keeps the data in ram.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants