You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
It looks like batching was added in #437 - thank you for implementing this, it's very helpful.
I notice that batching, as defined here, depends on a fixed batch size. This can be suboptimal for clients submitting a large number of smaller documents, as we cannot configure the ThreadPoolExecutor size to parallelize a large number of small data payloads. As a result a client might end up blocking while waiting for small network responses.
Would it be possible to allow clients to configure either the ThreadPoolExecutor size or the embed_batch_size setting when calling embed?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Hey @acompa thanks for the feedback, this will be fixed by #536 ! you will be able to pass your own executor in. I'll ping the thread when it's released
It looks like batching was added in #437 - thank you for implementing this, it's very helpful.
I notice that batching, as defined here, depends on a fixed batch size. This can be suboptimal for clients submitting a large number of smaller documents, as we cannot configure the ThreadPoolExecutor size to parallelize a large number of small data payloads. As a result a client might end up blocking while waiting for small network responses.
Would it be possible to allow clients to configure either the
ThreadPoolExecutor
size or theembed_batch_size
setting when callingembed
?The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: