面试题库
共 328 题,当前筛选 1 题。
课程全部30 天从前端工程师到 Agent 工程师5 天提示词工程零基础Claude 高效使用:从对话到 Claude CodeCodex 与 OpenAI Agents SDK 高效使用7 天 MCP:把工具接进任何 Agent7 天 Agent Skills:把经验做成可复用能力5 天上下文工程14 天 RAG:从检索到可信回答14 天用 Agent 搭一条 AI 短剧生产线
标签
全部#parent-child1#evaluation30#cost29#reliability24#architecture22#agent-skills21#security18#observability15#streaming12#error-handling11#idempotency10#system-design10
还有 359 个标签收起标签
#api-design9#coding-agent9#distributed-systems8#multi-agent8#rag8#chunking7#debugging7#pipeline-design7#structured-output7#agent-loop6#mcp6#operations6#prompt-injection6#sse6#tool-calling6#tool-design6#context5#context-engineering5#deployment5#embeddings5#hybrid-search5#message-bus5#scheduling5#system-prompt5#agentic-rag4#behavioral4#client4#concurrency4#consistency4#framework-design4#ingestion4#prompt-engineering4#rate-limiting4#retrieval4#routing4#trade-offs4#abstention3#agents-sdk3#caching3#communication3#context-window3#cost-control3#data-quality3#failure-modes3#image-generation3#interview-prep3#langgraph3#latency3#llm-as-judge3#llm-basics3#long-context3#model-migration3#model-routing3#orchestration3#ordering3#progressive-disclosure3#prompt-basics3#prompt-caching3#protocol3#provider-abstraction3#ranking3#recall3#redis-streams3#responses-api3#resume3#retry3#runtime3#scalability3#skills3#state-management3#statelessness3#subagents3#timeline3#versioning3#workflow-engine3#access-control2#agent-design2#async-task2#auth2#checkpointing2#citation-verification2#citations2#claude-md2#code-review2#compaction2#context-rot2#contextual-retrieval2#cost-tradeoff2#data-modeling2#database2#distribution2#fallback2#ffmpeg2#golden-set2#grounding2#interview-process2#long-term-memory2#media-pipeline2#memory2#multi-hop2#multi-tenancy2#oauth2#prioritization2#project-storytelling2#prompt-techniques2#query-rewriting2#react2#refusal2#reproducibility2#rerank2#retrieval-quality2#retrospective2#scripts2#sharding2#state-machine2#tool-permissions2#tooling2#tools2#tracing2#transport2#tts2#ux2#vector-database2#verification2#workflow2#agent-basics1#agent-quality1#agent-sdk1#agents-md1#altitude1#analytics1#approvals1#architecture-review1#async1#atomicity1#attention-budget1#av-sync1#backoff1#bi-encoder1#bm251#budget-control1#build-vs-buy1#cancellation1#candidate-selection1#capacity-planning1#career1#chain-of-thought1#ci1#circuit-breaker1#claude-code1#cli-design1#client-integration1#cloud1#compression1#configuration1#confused-deputy1#consistent-hashing1#content-hash1#content-safety1#context-assembly1#context-compression1#context-management1#coreference1#correctness1#cost-accounting1#cost-analysis1#cost-optimization1#cross-encoder1#cross-model1#customer-support1#dag1#decision-making1#decomposition1#degradation1#deliberate-practice1#design1#diagnostics1#dimensions1#docker1#documentation1#embedding-migration1#encoding1#engineering-judgement1#engineering-tradeoffs1#error-propagation1#escalation1#eval1#event-driven1#evidence1#failure-analysis1#fairness1#faithfulness1#fan-out1#feedback-loop1#fencing-token1#few-shot1#filter-pushdown1#filtering1#fine-tuning1#forking1#four-elements1#framework-selection1#frontend1#global-market1#graph-rag1#guardrails1#hallucination1#handoff1#handoffs1#headless1#hnsw1#hooks1#human-in-the-loop1#hybrid1#hyde1#incremental-recompute1#incremental-sync1#index-maintenance1#index-routing1#indexing1#information-retrieval1#instruction-hierarchy1#integration1#intent-routing1#interrupt-merge1#invalidation1#isolation1#iterative-scan1#ivfflat1#json-parsing1#json-schema1#just-in-time1#jwt1#knowledge-organization1#latency-budget1#lease1#least-privilege1#llm-output-quality1#long-session1#loop-guard1#maintenance1#mcp-basics1#mental-model1#messages-api1#metadata1#methodology1#metrics1#migration1#mobile1#model-selection1#moderation1#modularity1#multi-turn1#multimodal1#nodejs1#normalisation1#notifications1#ocr1#offline-testing1#openai1#overlap1#pagination1#pdf-parsing1#performance1#permissions1#persistence1#pgvector1#pipeline-reliability1#portfolio1#primitives1#priority-queue1#proactive-messaging1#product-engineering1#production-readiness1#prompt1#prompt-assembly1#prompt-bloat1#prompt-design1#prompt-limits1#prompt-surface1#prompt-template1#prompt-versioning1#prompting1#protocol-versions1#quality1#quality-check1#quantization1#query-transformation1#quiet-hours1#rag-basics1#rank-fusion1#reasoning1#reconnect1#redis1#reflection1#replay1#reporting1#retrieval-failure1#retrieval-metrics1#retry-semantics1#retry-strategy1#review1#risk-assessment1#rollback1#rollout1#rrf1#safety1#sampling1#sandbox1#sandboxing1#scaling1#schema-design1#schema-validation1#scoping1#secrets-management1#self-assessment1#self-introduction1#self-presentation1#self-reflection1#server-design1#service-architecture1#session-management1#sessions1#similarity1#skill-authoring1#skill-description1#skill-design1#spec1#split-brain1#stakeholder-communication1#star1#state-persistence1#stateless1#stdio-transport1#stopping-criteria1#storytelling1#subagent1#subscriptions1#subtitles1#task-graph1#team-governance1#test-set1#test-strategy1#testing1#thresholds1#timezone1#token-accounting1#token-budget1#tool-budget1#tool-execution1#tool-naming1#tool-schema1#trust-boundary1#tuning1#validation1#vector-index1#workflow-design1#xml-tags1#zero-downtime1
14 天 RAG:从检索到可信回答
D4 切块策略:固定、递归、按结构、父子与语义五种切法,以及用评估而不是直觉来选
父子切块的收益是什么?它在什么情况下反而会拖慢系统?What does parent-child chunking buy you, and when does it slow the system down instead?
国内高频海外高频进阶#chunking#parent-child分析过程 · 先想清楚再作答
- 这题考的是你有没有意识到「检索单位」和「上下文单位」可以是两个东西。答不出这句话,后面说什么都是复述。
- 收益一句话说清:小块进索引,信噪比高、容易被找到;命中之后顺着父指针把整节回填给模型,语境完整。精度和完整度这次不用二选一。
- 拖慢的场景要从代价一条条推。第一条是上下文预算:每命中一个新子块可能拖进来一整个父节,同样的 token 预算装不下几条,检索结果的多样性反而变差。
- 第二条是写入侧:父子两套都要维护,文档更新时两边都要重算,块 id 的稳定性也更难保证,增量同步的复杂度明显上升。
- 第三条是收益消失的条件:当文档本身的小节就不长时,父块和子块差不多大,你付了两套索引的钱,什么也没多买到。所以父子切块适合长节、深层级的文档,不适合结构本来就细碎的知识库。
- 可预期的追问是「那和直接把块切大有什么区别」。答:切大是把噪声一起放进索引,父子是只把噪声放进上下文、不放进索引——被检索的那一段始终是干净的短文本,这是本质区别。
How to reason about it · think before answering
- This question checks whether you know that the retrieval unit and the context unit can be two different things. Without that sentence, everything else is recitation.
- State the benefit compactly: small chunks go into the index so they are easy to match, and once a child is hit you follow the parent pointer and hand the model the whole section. You stop trading precision against completeness.
- Derive the slowdown from the costs. First, the context budget: every new child may drag in an entire parent, so an equal budget holds fewer distinct pieces and result diversity drops.
- Second, the write path: two levels to maintain, both recomputed on every document update, and chunk ids become harder to keep stable, which makes incremental sync noticeably more complex.
- Third, the condition under which the benefit disappears: when sections are already short, the parent and the child are nearly the same text, so you paid for two indexes and bought nothing. Parent-child suits long sections and deep hierarchies, not already fine-grained knowledge bases.
- Expect the follow-up: how is this different from simply using bigger chunks. Bigger chunks put the noise into the index; parent-child puts the noise only into the context. What gets matched stays short and clean.
答题要点
- 核心是把检索单位和上下文单位拆开:小块负责被找到,大块负责被读懂。
- 收益是精度与完整度同时拿到,不用在信噪比和语境之间二选一。
- 代价一:一次命中可能拖进整个父节,同样的上下文预算装得下的条数变少,结果多样性下降。
- 代价二:父子两套索引都要维护与重算,文档更新时增量同步的复杂度明显上升。
- 失效场景:文档小节本来就短时父子块差不多大,多付一套成本却没多买到东西。
Key points
- The core idea is decoupling the retrieval unit from the context unit: small chunks get found, large chunks get understood.
- The payoff is precision and completeness at the same time instead of trading one for the other.
- Cost one: a single hit can drag in a whole parent, so an equal context budget holds fewer distinct results and diversity suffers.
- Cost two: two index levels to maintain and recompute, which makes incremental sync on document updates considerably harder.
- It stops paying off when sections are already short, because parent and child are nearly identical and you bought nothing for the extra cost.