Fantastic :). Will take a look. I think with all those - if there are no comments from others in a day or so - might be a good time to (re-) start a formal lazy consensus. Just one small comment - in the email state the time when lazy consensus will be reached (usually we allow 72 HRs minimum (you can see similar mails in the https://lists.apache.org/list.html?dev@airflow.apache.org
On Thu, Jan 18, 2024 at 7:12 AM Anush Shetty <anush.she...@qdrant.com> wrote: > Hey guys. Just pushed the integration tests for the Qdrant provider with > the CI configurations as requested and some refactoring for the Qdrant hook > to remove redundancy. > > On Tue, 16 Jan 2024 at 19:58, Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote: > > > > self hosted image and the cloud offering, comprehensive integration > tests > > with the > > Docker image should suffice. > > > > I am fine with that. > > > > On Tue, Jan 16, 2024 at 3:00 PM Anush Shetty <anush.she...@qdrant.com> > > wrote: > > > > > P.S. The updates to Qdrant and the clients are backwards compatible. > > > Further reducing any maintenance overhead. > > > > > > On Tue, 16 Jan, 2024, 7:29 pm Anush Shetty, <anush.she...@qdrant.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > We'd gladly add the integration tests along with the mock tests that > > are > > > > currently in place and since there's no difference in running a self > > > hosted > > > > image and the cloud offering, comprehensive integration tests with > the > > > > Docker image should suffice. > > > > > > > > As you said, would appreciate any thoughts from the community. > > > > > > > > On Tue, 16 Jan, 2024, 7:11 pm Jarek Potiuk, <ja...@potiuk.com> > wrote: > > > > > > > >> BTW: Dashboard links here: > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > https://airflow.apache.org/ecosystem/#airflow-provider-system-test-dashboards > > > >> > > > >> On Tue, Jan 16, 2024 at 2:39 PM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> > > wrote: > > > >> > > > >> > I'd love to hear from others in the community who already use > Qdrant > > > >> what > > > >> > they think :) ? > > > >> > > > > >> > Few comments to Anush: > > > >> > > > > >> > I did a bit of review of the links and did some usual research. > > > >> > > > > >> > 1) Re: requirements it does not introduce any big issues. Urllib3 > < > > 2 > > > >> is a > > > >> > bit strange (but we are anyhow limited by botocore now, so not a > big > > > >> issue, > > > >> > I hope it can be removed in the future. > > > >> > > > > >> > Requires-Dist: fastembed (==0.1.1) ; (python_version < "3.12") and > > > >> (extra > > > >> > == "fastembed") > > > >> > Requires-Dist: grpcio (>=1.41.0) > > > >> > Requires-Dist: grpcio-tools (>=1.41.0) > > > >> > Requires-Dist: httpx[http2] (>=0.14.0) > > > >> > Requires-Dist: numpy (<1.21) ; python_version < "3.8" > > > >> > Requires-Dist: numpy (>=1.21) ; python_version >= "3.8" and > > > >> python_version > > > >> > < "3.12" > > > >> > Requires-Dist: numpy (>=1.26) ; python_version >= "3.12" > > > >> > Requires-Dist: portalocker (>=2.7.0,<3.0.0) > > > >> > Requires-Dist: pydantic (>=1.10.8) > > > >> > Requires-Dist: urllib3 (>=1.26.14,<2.0.0) > > > >> > > > > >> > 2) Open source version seems to be fully supported and alive. > This > > > >> looks > > > >> > pretty cool after looking at the information provided. The code is > > > small > > > >> > and literally calling the library QdrantClient, so it does not > seem > > > like > > > >> > something that might require a lot of maintenance, > > > >> > > > > >> > My concerns are with testability and future-proof maintenance. > This > > > is a > > > >> > fast-pacing area. There will be breaking changes. Yes. There are > > unit > > > >> > tests and system tests there. But we have no time/possibility to > run > > > our > > > >> > tests against real quadrant serve and especially against one run > in > > > the > > > >> > cloud "by hand". > > > >> > > > > >> > So, two points: > > > >> > > > > >> > 1) Open-source version: Similar to Kafka provider - seems Qdrant > > has a > > > >> > nicely dockerized version that can be installed from officially > > > released > > > >> > images (https://qdrant.tech/documentation/quick-start/) - seems > > like > > > >> > perfect candidate to run integration tests with it on our CI. If > > that > > > is > > > >> > there, this means that we can both - easily make sure it continues > > to > > > >> work, > > > >> > but also - equally easily bump the version of Qudrant when new > > > >> major/minor > > > >> > release is out and have our tests run automatically in our CI. And > > it > > > >> will > > > >> > nicely run in Breeze with `breeze --integration qdrant` when > someone > > > >> wants > > > >> > to run the integration tests locally: See > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/tree/main/tests/integration/providers/apache/kafka > > > >> > and > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/blob/main/scripts/ci/docker-compose/integration-kafka.yml > > > >> > - I think that shoudl be condition of approving it > > > >> > > > > >> > 2) Cloud version: It would also help if you could (especially if > you > > > >> want > > > >> > to run the system tests against your cloud) that you get similar > > > >> dashboards > > > >> > as we have for Amazon and other LLM providers (maintained by > > > Astronomer) > > > >> > which would show the status of system tests you run with main > > version. > > > >> > > > > >> > Are you ok with extending the PR and adding integration tests and > > > >> > committing to maintaining such a dashboard? > > > >> > > > > >> > If there are voices from the community "yeah it's useful" - and > the > > > >> points > > > >> > 1) and 2) are addressed, I am quite positive about accepting the > > > >> provider :) > > > >> > > > > >> > J > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > On Tue, Jan 16, 2024 at 1:41 PM Anush Shetty < > > anush.she...@qdrant.com > > > > > > > >> > wrote: > > > >> > > > > >> >> Hello, Airflow community, > > > >> >> > > > >> >> I am Anush - an Integrations engineer at Qdrant. This discussion > > > >> proposes > > > >> >> to include Qdrant as a supported provider for Airflow. > > > >> >> Following up on > > > >> https://lists.apache.org/list.html?dev@airflow.apache.org > > > >> >> . > > > >> >> > > > >> >> Qdrant - https://github.com/qdrant/qdrant, is an open-source > > vector > > > >> >> search > > > >> >> engine and database, governed by the Apache-2.0 license, allowing > > > >> complete > > > >> >> freedom for commercial usage and redistribution. > > > >> >> > > > >> >> Proposed provider PR: > https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/36805 > > > >> >> > > > >> >> Qdrant ranks amongst the most performant and most used vector > > > databases > > > >> >> available today. > > > >> >> - https://qdrant.tech/benchmarks/ > > > >> >> - https://ossinsight.io/collections/vector-search-engine/ > > > >> >> > > > >> >> We believe Qdrant would be a valuable addition for Airflow users > to > > > >> have > > > >> >> as > > > >> >> an option when building DAGs. > > > >> >> > > > >> >> Qdrant can be deployed by users on their own or via Qdrant's > cloud > > > >> >> offering. > > > >> >> > > > >> >> The proposed provider supports interfacing with Qdrant instances > > > >> through > > > >> >> both REST and GRPC interfaces without any restrictions on the > mode > > of > > > >> >> deployment used. > > > >> >> > > > >> >> As part of our commitment, the Qdrant team is willing to > undertake > > > the > > > >> >> responsibility of maintaining and updating the provider as per > user > > > >> >> requests or any identified needs. > > > >> >> > > > >> >> Anush > > > >> >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
