chore: Added init_options property #541
Conversation
✅ Deploy Preview for poetic-froyo-8baba7 ready!
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site configuration. |
|
Hey @Anush008 It does not sound like the right motivation Could you please provide more details and explain the need? |
|
@joein, yes. For instances like these. https://discord.com/channels/907569970500743200/1206597766999056435/1206601751747371089 Some frameworks require us to pass SDK instances and not the params to construct those. So instead of forcing users to pass 2 instances(sync, async) of essentially the same thing, we can construct one from the other. |
|
Could you please explain why do they need to create two instances? |
|
To implement the sync and async interfaces of the frameworks. Like Langchain for example, has equivalent sync and async methods that've been implemented. https://python.langchain.com/docs/modules/data_connection/vectorstores/#asynchronous-operations |
|
So can they just use one client or another one? Why do they need to use both simultaneously? What is the use case for having two clients at the same time? |
|
For example, the So for Qdrant#add_documents(...)
...
await Qdrant#asimiliarity_search(...)
...
await Qdrant#aadd_documents(...)
...
Qdrant#similiarity_search(...)to work, we need the sync and async instances within the |
* chore: Added init_options property * refactor: @Property * test: init_opts * chore: regen async client again with Py 3.10 * chore: deepcopy kwargs
Why?
This change will be helpful in our integration implementations as we won't have to necessitate users to pass instances of both
QdrantClientandAsyncQdrantClient. Either one will suffice.