-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 255
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
feat: object store registry for custom object store providers #2513
Conversation
ACTION NEEDED The PR title and description are used as the merge commit message. Please update your PR title and description to match the specification. For details on the error please inspect the "PR Title Check" action. |
19aea15
to
afb3e82
Compare
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.
Thanks for making a PR. I'm in favor of making the registry extensible. I think a good property of an extensible registry is that the default values are able to be inserted using the extension point. That ensures that third-parties have all the APIs they need to properly extend Lance. I don't think you have to do that refactor immediately in this PR. Instead, I've made some suggestions about some tweaks we would likely need to make to be able to use the registry for our default stores.
Thanks for your comments, @wjones127 ! One thought I had was that the |
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.
This looks close to ready to merge. I think we can remove the changes to optimize
since the registry won't actually be used by those code paths. And it will simplify the optimize APIs.
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #2513 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 79.44% 79.41% -0.04%
==========================================
Files 221 221
Lines 64683 64744 +61
Branches 64683 64744 +61
==========================================
+ Hits 51388 51415 +27
- Misses 10335 10366 +31
- Partials 2960 2963 +3
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
Given There is a |
Would you like me to do this as part of this MR or would you like me to follow up in another MR? edit: personally I'd be more comfortable doing it in a follow-up MR because I think it would have a big knock-on how the default object stores are constructed; I think it would need moving |
You can do that in a follow up PR. |
Awesome. Is there anything else that needs to be taken care of in this MR? |
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 good. Thanks!
This change lays the groundwork for LanceDB to support custom implementations of object stores, selected by a custom URL scheme.
Ref: https://discord.com/channels/1030247538198061086/1197630564254101618/1208915798425477181