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

fix(llmobs): fix content arg extraction for vertex ai integration [backport 2.18] #12071

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 24, 2025

Conversation

github-actions[bot]
Copy link
Contributor

@github-actions github-actions bot commented Jan 24, 2025

Backport 67a5a9c from #12034 to 2.18.

In MLOS-42 a customer was experiencing the following error:

ddtrace.internal.utils.ArgumentError: contents (at position 0)

where the content argument was not being extracted properly from the list of keyword arguments inputted into the chat.send_message method.

This is because in the Vertex AI integration, we look for the contents keyword argument. However, the content field is titled content in the send_message method and contents in the generate_content method, so it is necessary to differentiate between these two cases.

This PR is a small fix that corrects this error by differentiating between chat and completion requests in order to extract either content or contents respectively.

Testing

Automatic Testing

I edited some of the currently existing tests to use the keyword argument extraction rather than the positional argument extraction to get the content in order to confirm that this fix resolves the error.

Manual Testing

Running the following code reproduced the error; furthermore, I confirmed that with this fix, the error is no longer present and the request completes successfully.

llm = GenerativeModel("gemini-1.5-flash")
chat = llm.start_chat()
resp = chat.send_message(content="hello")

I also verified that the following code which uses the generate_content method is not impacted (continues to work as before) as a result of this fix.

llm = GenerativeModel("gemini-1.5-flash")
resp = llm.generate_content(contents="hello")

Checklist

  • PR author has checked that all the criteria below are met
  • The PR description includes an overview of the change
  • The PR description articulates the motivation for the change
  • The change includes tests OR the PR description describes a testing strategy
  • The PR description notes risks associated with the change, if any
  • Newly-added code is easy to change
  • The change follows the library release note guidelines
  • The change includes or references documentation updates if necessary
  • Backport labels are set (if applicable)

Reviewer Checklist

  • Reviewer has checked that all the criteria below are met
  • Title is accurate
  • All changes are related to the pull request's stated goal
  • Avoids breaking API changes
  • Testing strategy adequately addresses listed risks
  • Newly-added code is easy to change
  • Release note makes sense to a user of the library
  • If necessary, author has acknowledged and discussed the performance implications of this PR as reported in the benchmarks PR comment
  • Backport labels are set in a manner that is consistent with the release branch maintenance policy

…2034)

In [MLOS-42](https://datadoghq.atlassian.net/browse/MLOS-42) a customer
was experiencing the following error:
```
ddtrace.internal.utils.ArgumentError: contents (at position 0)
```
where the `content` argument was not being extracted properly from the
list of keyword arguments inputted into the `chat.send_message` method.

This is because in the Vertex AI integration, we look for the `contents`
keyword argument. However, the content field is titled `content` in the
[send_message](https://github.com/google-gemini/generative-ai-python/blob/main/google/generativeai/generative_models.py#L514)
method and `contents` in the
[generate_content](https://github.com/google-gemini/generative-ai-python/blob/main/google/generativeai/generative_models.py#L239)
method, so it is necessary to differentiate between these two cases.

This PR is a small fix that corrects this error by differentiating
between chat and completion requests in order to extract either
`content` or `contents` respectively.

## Testing

### Automatic Testing
I edited some of the currently existing tests to use the keyword
argument extraction rather than the positional argument extraction to
get the content in order to confirm that this fix resolves the error.

### Manual Testing
Running the following code reproduced the error; furthermore, I
confirmed that with this fix, the error is no longer present and the
request completes successfully.
```
llm = GenerativeModel("gemini-1.5-flash")
chat = llm.start_chat()
resp = chat.send_message(content="hello")
```

I also verified that the following code which uses the generate_content
method is not impacted (continues to work as before) as a result of this
fix.

```
llm = GenerativeModel("gemini-1.5-flash")
resp = llm.generate_content(contents="hello")
```

## Checklist
- [x] PR author has checked that all the criteria below are met
- The PR description includes an overview of the change
- The PR description articulates the motivation for the change
- The change includes tests OR the PR description describes a testing
strategy
- The PR description notes risks associated with the change, if any
- Newly-added code is easy to change
- The change follows the [library release note
guidelines](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/stable/releasenotes.html)
- The change includes or references documentation updates if necessary
- Backport labels are set (if
[applicable](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/latest/contributing.html#backporting))

## Reviewer Checklist
- [x] Reviewer has checked that all the criteria below are met
- Title is accurate
- All changes are related to the pull request's stated goal
- Avoids breaking
[API](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/stable/versioning.html#interfaces)
changes
- Testing strategy adequately addresses listed risks
- Newly-added code is easy to change
- Release note makes sense to a user of the library
- If necessary, author has acknowledged and discussed the performance
implications of this PR as reported in the benchmarks PR comment
- Backport labels are set in a manner that is consistent with the
[release branch maintenance
policy](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/latest/contributing.html#backporting)

[MLOS-42]:
https://datadoghq.atlassian.net/browse/MLOS-42?atlOrigin=eyJpIjoiNWRkNTljNzYxNjVmNDY3MDlhMDU5Y2ZhYzA5YTRkZjUiLCJwIjoiZ2l0aHViLWNvbS1KU1cifQ

---------

Co-authored-by: Yun Kim <[email protected]>
(cherry picked from commit 67a5a9c)
@github-actions github-actions bot requested review from a team as code owners January 24, 2025 15:38
@github-actions github-actions bot requested review from gnufede and tabgok January 24, 2025 15:38
@datadog-dd-trace-py-rkomorn
Copy link

Datadog Report

Branch report: backport-12034-to-2.18
Commit report: a35c150
Test service: dd-trace-py

✅ 0 Failed, 1468 Passed, 0 Skipped, 25m 35.23s Total duration (12m 36.13s time saved)

@pr-commenter
Copy link

pr-commenter bot commented Jan 24, 2025

Benchmarks

Benchmark execution time: 2025-01-24 16:18:53

Comparing candidate commit a35c150 in PR branch backport-12034-to-2.18 with baseline commit 0e3612f in branch 2.18.

Found 0 performance improvements and 0 performance regressions! Performance is the same for 394 metrics, 2 unstable metrics.

@ncybul ncybul closed this Jan 24, 2025
@ncybul ncybul reopened this Jan 24, 2025
Copy link
Contributor Author

CODEOWNERS have been resolved as:

releasenotes/notes/fix-vertexai-content-extraction-b216207bd8192e5f.yaml  @DataDog/apm-python
ddtrace/contrib/internal/vertexai/_utils.py                             @DataDog/ml-observability
ddtrace/contrib/internal/vertexai/patch.py                              @DataDog/ml-observability
ddtrace/llmobs/_integrations/vertexai.py                                @DataDog/ml-observability
tests/contrib/vertexai/test_vertexai.py                                 @DataDog/ml-observability
tests/contrib/vertexai/test_vertexai_llmobs.py                          @DataDog/ml-observability

@ncybul ncybul added changelog/no-changelog A changelog entry is not required for this PR. and removed changelog/no-changelog A changelog entry is not required for this PR. labels Jan 24, 2025
@ncybul ncybul merged commit 2409457 into 2.18 Jan 24, 2025
573 of 574 checks passed
@ncybul ncybul deleted the backport-12034-to-2.18 branch January 24, 2025 20:13
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