Skip to content

docs: update the readme to note Google provided integrations #173

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

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Mar 23, 2025

Conversation

dishaprakash
Copy link
Collaborator

Update the repo README to note Google provided integrations

@dishaprakash dishaprakash marked this pull request as ready for review March 20, 2025 16:47
@dishaprakash dishaprakash requested a review from eyurtsev March 20, 2025 16:48
@dishaprakash
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Previously we had raised #132,
we have now implemented both db agnostic dictionary filtering and test against the standard suite.

README.md Outdated

* [`langchain-google-cloud-sql-pg`](https://github.com/googleapis/langchain-google-cloud-sql-pg-python)

Using the Google Cloud provided integrations provides the following benefits:
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
Using the Google Cloud provided integrations provides the following benefits:
Using the Google Cloud integrations provides the following benefits:

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Changed

README.md Outdated

Using the Google Cloud provided integrations provides the following benefits:

- **Enhanced security**: Easily and securely connect to Google Cloud databases utilizing IAM for authorization and database authentication without needing to manage SSL certificates, configure firewall rules, or enable authorized networks.
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Consider dropping marketing language from technical docs. (words like "easily" aren't great for technical docs)

Suggested change
- **Enhanced security**: Easily and securely connect to Google Cloud databases utilizing IAM for authorization and database authentication without needing to manage SSL certificates, configure firewall rules, or enable authorized networks.
- **Enhanced Security**: Securely connect to Google Cloud databases utilizing IAM for authorization and database authentication without needing to manage SSL certificates, configure firewall rules, or enable authorized networks.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Sure, I've revised it

README.md Outdated
- **Enhanced security**: Easily and securely connect to Google Cloud databases utilizing IAM for authorization and database authentication without needing to manage SSL certificates, configure firewall rules, or enable authorized networks.
- **Simplified and Secure Connections:** Connect to Google Cloud databases effortlessly using the instance name instead of complex connection strings. The integrations creates a secure connection pool that can be easily shared across your application using the `engine` object.

Learn how to [migrate a `PGVector` vector store to `AlloyDBVectorStore`](https://github.com/googleapis/langchain-google-alloydb-pg-python/blob/main/samples/migrations/migrate_pgvector_to_alloydb.md) to gain the following benefits:
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The marketing language is very strong here. I think it's fair to have a summary of which features are supported by each implementation. Right now, this is just reading as a recommendation to migrate off PGVector to alloydbvectorstore, which I don't think is appropriate.

Perhaps a table listing in column the features, packages on the row, and information about whether the feature is supported or not?


Is database agnostic filtering implemented? If not, could you specify that.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I've revised it into a tabular form, and yes db agnostic filtering has been implemented now (and mentioned in the table).

@dishaprakash dishaprakash requested a review from eyurtsev March 21, 2025 08:39
@eyurtsev
Copy link
Collaborator

@dishaprakash I believe you have merge permissions if so merge away whenever you're ready!

@dishaprakash dishaprakash merged commit be2fc47 into main Mar 23, 2025
5 checks passed
@dishaprakash dishaprakash deleted the google-vs branch March 23, 2025 07:32
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.

3 participants