-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.3k
bugfix: rag memleak with weakref #294
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
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.
Summary of Changes
Hello @zcuder, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!
I've implemented a fix for a memory leak identified in the RAG component. The issue stemmed from a circular reference created by the single_string_embedder closure holding a strong reference to the RAG instance. My changes introduce the use of Python's weakref module to break this cycle, ensuring that RAG objects are properly garbage collected when they are no longer referenced, thereby improving the application's memory efficiency.
Highlights
- Memory Leak Fix: I've introduced the
weakrefmodule and utilized it to create a weak reference to theRAGinstance within its__init__method. This is crucial for preventing a memory leak. - Circular Reference Resolution: The
single_string_embedderfunction, which is a closure, was implicitly holding a strong reference to theRAGinstance (self). This strong reference created a circular dependency, preventing theRAGobject from being garbage collected even when it was no longer needed. - Improved Memory Management: By changing the
single_string_embedderto accessself.embeddervia a weak reference (self_weakref()), I've broken this strong reference cycle. This ensures that theRAGinstance can be properly garbage collected, resolving the memory leak.
Using Gemini Code Assist
The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.
Invoking Gemini
You can request assistance from Gemini at any point in your pull request via creating an issue comment (i.e. comment on the pull request page) using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands.
| Feature | Command | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Code Review | /gemini review |
Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state. |
| Pull Request Summary | /gemini summary |
Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state. |
| Comment | @gemini-code-assist | Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in issue comments and review comments. |
| Help | /gemini help |
Displays a list of available commands. |
Customization
To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.
Limitations & Feedback
Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments or fill out our survey to provide feedback.
You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.
Footnotes
-
Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩
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.
Code Review
This pull request correctly addresses a potential memory leak in the RAG component by using a weak reference to break a reference cycle. My review includes a suggestion to make this fix more robust by explicitly handling the edge case where the weak-referenced object might have been garbage-collected, which will prevent silent failures and improve debuggability.
Co-authored-by: gemini-code-assist[bot] <176961590+gemini-code-assist[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
No description provided.