-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 234
feat: support subindex on ExactNNSearch #1617
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
Conversation
Signed-off-by: maxwelljin2 <gejin@berkeley.edu>
Signed-off-by: maxwelljin2 <gejin@berkeley.edu>
Signed-off-by: maxwelljin2 <gejin@berkeley.edu>
|
This PR introduces support for sub-indexing in the exactNNSearch by enabling nested documents. Here's a summary of the changes:
|
JoanFM
left a comment
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.
what happens when I call persist, does it persist and reload all the subindices?
|
I'll take a look on that. All doc contents should be persist. If the load_binary function call the initialization, it should reconstruct subindices. I'll try some examples |
And test it |
Signed-off-by: maxwelljin2 <gejin@berkeley.edu>
|
This new commit supports the persist storage on subindex document and includes the relevant test. |
| my_tens: NdArray[30] | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| def test_subindex_index(tmp_path): |
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 we should also check that find and find_subindex work
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.
Sure, I'll add that
Signed-off-by: maxwelljin2 <gejin@berkeley.edu>
Currently, the subindex feature is not available on exact in-memory NNIndexer. This PR aims to support nested documents for ExactNNIndexer