HappenLee commented on PR #67673:
URL: https://github.com/apache/doris/pull/67673#issuecomment-5692935956

   One remaining **[P2]** issue outside the five resource 
validation/consistency findings in my earlier comment: **validate `ai.effort` 
against the selected provider, rather than a union of all providers' values.**
   
   On the current head (`83a2ac73e5e5469ea3f1c83cafc31dbbb61dd89c`), 
`AIProperties.requiredAIProperties()` accepts 
`none|minimal|low|medium|high|xhigh|max` for every provider. For example, an 
otherwise valid ANTHROPIC resource with `ai.effort='none'` passes CREATE 
validation. `AnthropicAdapter` then forwards it unchanged as 
`output_config.effort`, although the [Anthropic API 
contract](https://platform.claude.com/docs/en/build-with-claude/effort) only 
supports `low|medium|high|xhigh|max`, with additional model-specific 
restrictions.
   
   References:
   - [FE 
validation](https://github.com/apache/doris/blob/83a2ac73e5e5469ea3f1c83cafc31dbbb61dd89c/fe/fe-core/src/main/java/org/apache/doris/datasource/property/constants/AIProperties.java#L66-L85)
   - [BE payload 
construction](https://github.com/apache/doris/blob/83a2ac73e5e5469ea3f1c83cafc31dbbb61dd89c/be/src/exprs/function/ai/ai_adapter.h#L1623-L1627)
   
   This affects requests that explicitly configure an unsupported effort value; 
existing usage that omits effort is unaffected by this issue. The expected 
upstream rejection follows from the code and API contract; I did not reproduce 
it against a live provider endpoint.
   
   This was [previously reported by the automated 
reviewer](https://github.com/apache/doris/pull/67673#discussion_r3975780989), 
so it is not a newly discovered finding. The current diff of #68023 does not 
cover effort validation. Please include provider-specific effort validation and 
negative tests in the follow-up, or separate the effort feature from this PR.
   
   Apart from the previously discussed resource issues and this P2, this 
re-review did not identify an additional P1 blocker. If these known issues are 
accepted for follow-up, I have no additional code-level objection to merging 
this PR first. This is not a claim that the outstanding issues are fixed.
   
   Validation for this re-review: changed-file clang-format 16.0.6, BE build 
hygiene, and diff whitespace checks passed. Builds and runtime tests were not 
rerun.
   


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to