feat(python-client): expose retain_async in retain() and aretain()#1306
Merged
nicoloboschi merged 1 commit intovectorize-io:mainfrom Apr 29, 2026
Merged
Conversation
Both single-memory convenience wrappers now accept retain_async and
forward it to retain_batch() / aretain_batch() respectively. Default
is False so existing call sites are unaffected.
The REST API's /v1/default/banks/{bank_id}/memories endpoint accepts
async: bool on every retain request, and both batch methods already
expose this via retain_async: bool = False. Since the convenience
wrappers simply delegate to the batch methods, there is no technical
reason to omit the parameter — users who want async on a single memory
today must switch to the batch API, which is an unnecessary friction.
This brings the Python SDK in line with the TypeScript SDK where
retain() exposes async?: boolean. PR vectorize-io#709 fixed aretain_batch() to
actually pass retain_async through to the request model (it was
silently dropped before), but the convenience wrappers were left
without the parameter.
Also adds unit tests verifying the kwarg is forwarded to prevent
silent regressions.
harryplusplus
force-pushed
the
feat/aretain-async
branch
from
ae5a96d to
88182d7
Compare
r266-tech
added a commit
to r266-tech/hindsight
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 29, 2026
r266-tech
added a commit
to r266-tech/hindsight
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 29, 2026
nicoloboschi
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 30, 2026
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
The REST API's
/v1/default/banks/{bank_id}/memoriesendpoint acceptsasync: boolon every retain request, and bothretain_batch()/aretain_batch()already expose this viaretain_async: bool = False. However, the single-memory convenience wrappersretain()/aretain()have never exposed it. Since these wrappers simply delegate to the batch methods, there is no technical reason to omit the parameter — users who want async on a single memory today must switch to the batch API, which is an unnecessary friction.The TypeScript SDK also exposes
async?: booleanon itsretain()method, so this brings the Python SDK in line.PR #709 fixed
aretain_batch()to actually passretain_asyncthrough to the request model (it was silently dropped before), but the convenience wrappers were left without the parameter.Changes
retain_async: bool = Falseto bothretain()andaretain(), forwarding it to the underlying batch methods.Fully backwards compatible — default is
False, matching existing behavior.Test plan
retain(bank_id, content)andaretain(bank_id, content)bind correctly without the new kwargtests/test_retain_async_kwarg.py)