-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 87
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
Fix ml.get_trained_models #1479
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I added some comments, but think it should also be reviewed by @davidkyle
specification/ml/get_trained_models/MlGetTrainedModelRequest.ts
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
@@ -162,6 +162,7 @@ export class InferenceConfigContainer { | |||
regression?: RegressionInferenceOptions | |||
/** Classification configuration for inference. */ | |||
classification?: ClassificationInferenceOptions | |||
ner?: NerInferenceOptions |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The inclusion of this ner option here is a bit confusing to me, since IMO it implies NER is supported in the inference bucket aggregation, which AFAIK is not true per the docs https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/elasticsearch/reference/master/search-aggregations-pipeline-inference-bucket-aggregation.html.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think these NLP properties are supported in inference processors in the create pipeline APi and in the create trained model API, so iMO it makes more sense to add these in https://github.com/elastic/elasticsearch-specification/blob/main/specification/ingest/_types/Processors.ts or https://github.com/elastic/elasticsearch-specification/blob/main/specification/ml/_types/TrainedModel.ts
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes the pipeline aggregation does not support any of the NLP features, this option is not valid here.
tags?: string | ||
tags?: string | string[] | ||
/** | ||
* @since 7.17.0 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks like this was introduced in 7.13.0 and deprecated then too: https://github.com/elastic/elasticsearch/blob/7.13/rest-api-spec/src/main/resources/rest-api-spec/api/ml.get_trained_models.json#L46
* @since 7.17.0 | |
* @since 7.13.0 | |
* @deprecated 7.13.0 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The entire API and include_model_definition
parameter were first added in 7.6: elastic/elasticsearch#49052
include_model_definition
was later deprecated in 7.10 by elastic/elasticsearch#62834
It looks like theJSON spec was not correctly updated at the same time hence the confusion.
Co-authored-by: Lisa Cawley <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Lisa Cawley <[email protected]>
Following you can find the validation results for the APIs you have changed.
You can validate these APIs yourself by using the |
2 similar comments
Following you can find the validation results for the APIs you have changed.
You can validate these APIs yourself by using the |
Following you can find the validation results for the APIs you have changed.
You can validate these APIs yourself by using the |
specification/ml/get_trained_models/MlGetTrainedModelRequest.ts
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
specification/ml/get_trained_models/MlGetTrainedModelRequest.ts
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Co-authored-by: David Kyle <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: David Kyle <[email protected]>
This spec change hasn't been touched in over a year. Can we close? |
@JoshMock yes we can close this is hopelessly outdated. I will review which changes should be carried forward and create a new PR if necessary. |
as titled.