Skip to content

[ENH] Proto defs for collection version file. #950 #3453

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

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Jan 10, 2025

Conversation

rohitcpbot
Copy link
Contributor

@rohitcpbot rohitcpbot commented Jan 9, 2025

Description of changes

Proto definitions and GRPC defs for supporting Versioned Collections.
Part of GC work.

Summarize the changes made by this PR.

  • Improvements & Bug fixes
    • ...
  • New functionality
    • Adds protobufs for Versioned Collections.

Test plan

How are these changes tested?

  • Tests pass locally with pytest for python, yarn test for js, cargo test for rust

Documentation Changes

Are all docstrings for user-facing APIs updated if required? Do we need to make documentation changes in the docs repository?
n/a

Copy link

github-actions bot commented Jan 9, 2025

Please tag your PR title with one of: [ENH | BUG | DOC | TST | BLD | PERF | TYP | CLN | CHORE]. See https://docs.trychroma.com/contributing#contributing-code-and-ideas

Copy link

github-actions bot commented Jan 9, 2025

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 Author

This stack of pull requests is managed by Graphite. Learn more about stacking.

@rohitcpbot rohitcpbot changed the title Protos for Garbage Collection work. [ENH] Proto defs for collection version file. Jan 9, 2025
@rohitcpbot rohitcpbot changed the title [ENH] Proto defs for collection version file. [ENH] Proto defs for collection version file. #950 Jan 9, 2025
@rohitcpbot rohitcpbot marked this pull request as ready for review January 9, 2025 03:07
// NOTE: As of now, we only support version change due to data compaction.
// There is a good chance to include other reasons in the future, especially
// for DDL operations, recovery, etc.
enum VersionChangeReason {
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

If this feels like over-engineering at this point, then i will just remove this. And add it later if/when we decide to increase versions for non-compaction purposes.

Includes proto for storing VersionHistory file,
and new GRPCs in SysDb.
There will be few more to support the GC tool/server
that will follow later.
@rohitcpbot rohitcpbot merged commit 30a8ea5 into main Jan 10, 2025
79 checks passed
@rohitcpbot rohitcpbot deleted the rcp/GC-Protos-GI950 branch January 10, 2025 08:08
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.

1 participant