Proposal looks solid and covers all needed aspects
Thank you for the time invested in drafting it.

On Thu, Jan 18, 2024 at 11:49 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:

> 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
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to