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

[Question]: Information on Agents #16600

Open
1 task done
sreenivasanm6 opened this issue Oct 18, 2024 · 4 comments
Open
1 task done

[Question]: Information on Agents #16600

sreenivasanm6 opened this issue Oct 18, 2024 · 4 comments
Labels
question Further information is requested

Comments

@sreenivasanm6
Copy link

Question Validation

  • I have searched both the documentation and discord for an answer.

Question

Why should one prefer llama index for agents when compared to langgraph? Please help in providing detail.

@sreenivasanm6 sreenivasanm6 added the question Further information is requested label Oct 18, 2024
Copy link

dosubot bot commented Oct 18, 2024

I wasn't able to find specific information comparing LlamaIndex and LangGraph for agents in the repository. However, LlamaIndex offers a comprehensive framework for building agentic systems with features like breaking down complex questions, choosing external tools, planning and executing tasks, and storing completed tasks in a memory module. It supports various use cases, provides prebuilt agent architectures, and allows for custom workflows. Additionally, LlamaIndex can be integrated as a tool within other agent frameworks, enhancing its versatility [1][2].

To continue talking to Dosu, mention @dosu.

@sreenivasanm6
Copy link
Author

@dosu not clear in specific to langgraph

@logan-markewich
Copy link
Collaborator

@sreenivasanm6 any agentic implementation in llama-index should probably be using workflows

While we do have prebuilts like FunctionCallingAgent to get started quickly, in most cases I see, users need so much customization that it makes sense to build more from-scratch with workflows
Workflow Docs
Function Calling Agent w/ Streaming, Dynamic Context

I can say that in my own observations/notes

  • Workflows will likely be cleaner, easier to understand, and less LOC than anything you can build with langgraph (there's a reason they've prioritized building stuff like langgraph studio)
  • Workflows, in comparison to other frameworks, are async first, which is super valuable in production workloads
  • The event-driven approach used by Workflows allows users to focus on what data each component requires in order to run and what data should be sent back, without the need of detailing the execution flow upfront.
  • Workflows naturally allow loops and arbitrary jumps from one component to another during execution.
  • Steps are in full control of the data they receive, making it easy to manage optional and default values.

The feedback on workflows has been positive from basically everyone who's tried it. I would say that the only negative that comes to mind is that not every developer is familiar with async+python

@sreenivasanm6
Copy link
Author

Thanks for the info.
How about the memory consumption, token limit usage of api calls etc. Will it be less or more when compared to langraph?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
question Further information is requested
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants