What the Data for This Category Looks Like
Core data for this category comes from daily production documents of cotton spinning, chemical fiber spinning, woven and knitted fabric enterprises. These include cotton blending lists, process setup sheets, equipment operation logs, yarn and grey fabric inspection reports, defect records, and more. Data sources cover raw fiber inspection reports, ERP systems, real-time loom data, evenness testers, results collected by fabric inspection machines, and order specification files. Update frequency aligns with production cycles. New documents are generated for each raw material batch, each production shift, and each fabric roll produced. Single documents typically include fields such as specific fiber metrics, process parameters, inspection values, and defect types. Some device-exported files use fixed numerical units. For example, twist is measured in twists per meter, and width is measured in centimeters.
Constraints Imposed on Document Parsing and Chunking
Production documents for this category update frequently, and each single document focuses on a specific production stage. Parsing and chunking must adapt to high-frequency, small-batch updated documents to avoid reduced retrieval accuracy caused by overly large chunks. Some device-exported documents have fixed numerical units and structured fields. If chunking logic does not adapt to structured content, field association information may be lost. Defect records and inspection sheets mostly consist of short text combinations. Overly fine chunking must be avoided, as this can cause context breaks and hinder parameter association during cross-review. Data formats vary widely across sources. Tables exported from ERP systems and plain text collected by equipment require unified parsing logic. Without this, field misalignment or content truncation may occur.
Configuration Settings
The following configurations are based on the parameter rules of FastGPT v4.17.0, and are adapted to the characteristics of production documents for the spinning and weaving category.
| Configuration Item | Recommended Setting | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
chunkSize | 800–1200 characters | Adapts to the length of structured fields and process parameters in single documents of this category, avoiding loss of complete process context after splitting |
chunkSplitter | Split by line breaks + structured prefixes (such as "Cotton Blending Plan:", "Defect Record:") | Adapts to the segmentation rules of cotton blending lists and inspection sheets, preserving the association between fields and business logic |
PARSE_FILE_TIMEOUT_SECONDS | 600 seconds | Covers the parsing time of large-volume inspection files exported by equipment, preventing task timeout and failure mid-process |
UPLOAD_FILE_MAX_SIZE | 1000 MB | Adapts to the total size of multiple device data files accompanying a single batch of raw materials, supporting batch upload of production documents |
customPdfParse | Enable structured parsing mode | Adapts to PDF process sheets exported from ERP systems, preserving the original structure of tables and fields to avoid content misalignment |
chunkSettingMode | Manual configuration | Adjust chunking rules separately for documents from different sources (such as device-exported, ERP-exported) to adapt to category-specific document formats |
Three Common Misconfigurations
- Phenomenon: After uploading a PDF link exported by spinning equipment, the parsing result only returns blank text or meaningless metadata fields. Cause: The structured parsing mode of
customPdfParseis not enabled, so content in encrypted or specially formatted PDF files exported by equipment cannot be recognized. - Phenomenon: Cross-business field concatenation appears in post-chunking context references. For example, cotton blending metrics and grey fabric defect records are assigned to the same chunk. Cause: The
chunkSplitteradapted to structured documents is not used. Splitting only by universal line breaks causes mixed content across fields. - Phenomenon: Documents processed with custom chunking rules locally produce retrieval results that do not match local expectations after being uploaded to the server. Cause: The
chunkSizeandchunkSplitterconfigurations are not unified. Differences in chunking logic across environments lead to mismatched context for vector embeddings.
How to Verify Proper Configuration
- A single cotton blending list PDF is uploaded, the parsed chunk list is reviewed, and process parameters and inspection results are confirmed to be correctly split into independent chunks.
- A single batch of device data files is uploaded, the parsing task status is checked for completion, and no timeout prompts are triggered. The
PARSE_FILE_TIMEOUT_SECONDSvalue is verified to be adapted to the file size. - Chunking results between local and server environments are compared,
chunkSizeandchunkSplitterconfigurations are confirmed to be consistent, and retrieval deviations caused by differences in chunking logic are avoided. - A link exported from an external fabric inspection machine is tested for upload, the parsing result is confirmed to include complete defect types and inspection values, and the effect of enabling
customPdfParseis verified.
The values provided here are common starting points, and should be measured against the reader's own samples.