Skip to content
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

Improved tokenizer fallback #3132

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Nov 15, 2024
Merged

Improved tokenizer fallback #3132

merged 6 commits into from
Nov 15, 2024

Conversation

pablonyx
Copy link
Contributor

Description

[Provide a brief description of the changes in this PR]

How Has This Been Tested?

[Describe the tests you ran to verify your changes]

Accepted Risk (provide if relevant)

N/A

Related Issue(s) (provide if relevant)

N/A

Mental Checklist:

  • All of the automated tests pass
  • All PR comments are addressed and marked resolved
  • If there are migrations, they have been rebased to latest main
  • If there are new dependencies, they are added to the requirements
  • If there are new environment variables, they are added to all of the deployment methods
  • If there are new APIs that don't require auth, they are added to PUBLIC_ENDPOINT_SPECS
  • Docker images build and basic functionalities work
  • Author has done a final read through of the PR right before merge

Backporting (check the box to trigger backport action)

Note: You have to check that the action passes, otherwise resolve the conflicts manually and tag the patches.

  • This PR should be backported (make sure to check that the backport attempt succeeds)

Copy link

vercel bot commented Nov 14, 2024

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎

Name Status Preview Comments Updated (UTC)
internal-search ✅ Ready (Inspect) Visit Preview 💬 Add feedback Nov 15, 2024 1:02am

f"Falling back to default embedding model: {DOCUMENT_ENCODER_MODEL}"
)

# If no provider specified, try to create HuggingFaceTokenizer with model_name
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This code looks excessively nested. Is there an opportunity to linearize the flow here?

@pablonyx pablonyx added this pull request to the merge queue Nov 15, 2024
@github-merge-queue github-merge-queue bot removed this pull request from the merge queue due to failed status checks Nov 15, 2024
@pablonyx pablonyx added this pull request to the merge queue Nov 15, 2024
github-merge-queue bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 15, 2024
* silence warning

* improved fallback logic

* k

* minor cosmetic update

* minor logic update

* nit
@pablonyx pablonyx removed this pull request from the merge queue due to a manual request Nov 15, 2024
@pablonyx pablonyx merged commit 24be13c into main Nov 15, 2024
8 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants