今日已更新 200 条资讯 | 累计 27375 条内容
关于我们

标签:#ha

找到 10381 篇相关文章

开源项目

Show HN: NixOS-DGX-Spark – Nix and NixOS on the DGX Spark

Try DGX Spark playbooks using Nix on DGX OS, or install NixOS on your DGX Spark for the full Nix experience. The repository provides USB images and a NixOS module with settings for DGX Spark systems. This works on the NVIDIA DGX Spark itself and also on the Asus Ascent GX10. See my 5 minute lightning talk from Planet Nix for an intro: https://youtu.be/AvK_gi_snJE?si=MPKv3iiuS9B5elIE

2026-08-03 原文 →
AI 资讯

The cache key that ignored the question

Two people asked a context compressor two completely different questions. It gave them the same answer. Not a similar answer — byte for byte the same 544 characters. Here's what that looked like: query="Fix the IntegrityError on commit" level=L0 -> 159 tok cache_hit=False query="Explain the tax rounding TODO in compute_tax" level=L3 -> 159 tok cache_hit=True identical output: yes (544 chars both) Different question. Different compression level. Same 544 characters, served from cache. Finding it I wasn't looking for this. I was auditing something else entirely — measuring how much meaning a context compressor loses, not how fast it runs. My harness feeds the same corpus through the compressor with different queries and checks which critical substrings survive: file paths, error types, line numbers, identifiers. I noticed two rows in my results table were identical. Same token count, same output. My first assumption was that my own harness had a bug — that I was passing the same query twice and hadn't noticed. So I changed the second query to something with no words in common with the first, and bumped the compression level from L0 to L3, which should change the output dramatically on its own. Same 544 characters. That was the moment it stopped being my bug. The cause One line: sid = content_hash(content) That sid was doing two jobs. It was the shadow ID — the handle used to refer to a stored document. And it was also the cache key. As a shadow ID it's correct: the same content should get the same handle. As a cache key it's wrong, because the output of compress() doesn't depend only on the content. It depends on the content and the query and the compression level. Two of those three inputs were simply not part of the key. So the first caller warmed the cache for a piece of content, and everyone who touched that same content afterwards got the first caller's answer — regardless of what they actually asked for. Why this is worse than a stale cache A stale cache gives y

2026-08-02 原文 →