Loading a different gguf was a one-line edit to phraser.model_path plus a
restart. It is now an owner-triggered IPC call, off unless configured.
internal/phraser/swap.go holds the safety properties as code:
- Never two models resident. The old llama-server is killed and reaped
before the new one is launched. One 1.7B fits the Vega iGPU; a
blue/green overlap would OOM the box, so it is not offered.
- Atomic from a turn's point of view. Swap drains the in-flight turns
(they finish on the old model), then refuses arrivals with ErrSwapping
until the new server has answered /v1/models. No turn ever sees half a
swap; refused turns fall back to the classifier cascade.
- A failed load rolls back. If the new model does not start or does not
probe, the previous one is reloaded and the call returns RolledBack
with the error. If the rollback also fails the daemon says so and
degrades to the classifier rather than pretending to serve.
Holders of the completion client are re-pointed, not rebuilt: llm.Client
guards its base URL and LLMPhraser.OnSwap re-points it, so the router, the
replier, the mail extractor and the memory evaluator follow the new port
without knowing a swap happened.
Reach is deliberately narrow. phraser.swap_models is an exact-match
allowlist of absolute paths a human wrote, rejected at startup otherwise,
so "swap the model" can never mean "load any file on my disk"; the running
model is always swappable back to. MethodSwapModel is AuthStepUp, the same
rung as mutating the tool allowlist, and /models gates POST through the
same stepUpOK the tools page uses. Nothing calls Swap on a timer and no
act, intent or utterance reaches it.
Vikunja #250
The extraction half. internal/email.Extractor asks the resident Qwen3-1.7B,
under a GBNF grammar, what one message requires of him, and returns at most
three short candidates with an optional date.
Everything it can produce is a row in `tasks` with status "candidate",
written through the intake seam #130 built for exactly this (Source
"email:<mailbox>", Evidence = the subject line). No reminder, no fact, no
note, no calendar event. That bound is the design: a reminder FIRES, so a
1.7B misreading "встреча была в четверг" as a future appointment would wake
him up about it, whereas a wrong candidate is a line he dismisses in one
click. A due date the model read out of the mail is stored on the candidate,
where no scheduler reads it — the review page sorts by it. Relative wording
("до пятницы") is deliberately left in the text rather than resolved to a
date the model would get wrong.
The prompt is written against the two things a small model does here: it
summarises when asked to extract, and it invents an obligation out of a
polite closing line. Hence the demand for a verb phrase, and an explicit
empty array — most mail contains no task, and a model with no way to say
"nothing" says something.
Wiring: core owns extraction because llama-server lives in core's process,
so the reader hands messages over a new ipc.MethodIngestMail. It is a Server
hook (like StepUp/UnlockFn), not a CoreAPI method — not a store operation,
and no CoreAPI implementation should have to carry it. The hook stays nil
without an `email` config block or without a llama-server phraser, so the
method answers ErrUnknownMethod: off unless configured, twice over. There is
no keyword fallback on purpose — "the subject became a task" is a mailbox
rendered as a to-do list, not extraction.
Privacy: junk is refused before the model is called, mail text is never
search input, extraction errors carry byte counts rather than the reply, the
stored evidence is a truncated subject, and the log line names the mailbox
and the UID only.
kami