qdrant VS pgvector

I'm currently looking to implement locally, using QDrant [1] for instance.

I'm just playing around, but it makes sense to have a runnable example for our users at work too :) [2].

[1]. https://qdrant.tech/

Also compare with qdrant's Rust implementation; they tout their performance. https://github.com/qdrant/qdrant/tree/master/lib/segment/src...

There are much better known examples, such as https://qdrant.tech/ and https://github.com/lancedb/lancedb

For more information, see our release notes. Qdrant is an open source project. We welcome your contributions; raise issues, or contribute via pull requests!

Initialize the Qdrant Client with in-memory storage. The collection name will be “imagebind_data” and we will be using cosine distance.

Qdrant is an open-source vector search engine optimized for performance and flexibility. It supports both exact and approximate nearest neighbor search, providing a balance between accuracy and speed for various AI and ML applications.

Qdrant serves as a vector database, optimized for handling high-dimensional data typically found in AI and ML applications. It's designed for efficient storage and retrieval of vectors, making it an ideal solution for managing the data produced and consumed by AI models like Mistral 7B. In our setup, Qdrant handles the storage of vectors generated by the language model, facilitating quick and accurate retrievals.

For this example, I wanted to focus on how pgvector  – an open-source vector similarity search for Postgres – can be used to identify data similarities that exist in enterprise data.

There's an issue in the pgvector repo about someone having several ~10-20million row tables and getting acceptable performance with the right hardware and some performance tuning: https://github.com/pgvector/pgvector/issues/455

I'm in the early stages of evaluating pgvector myself. but having used pinecone I currently am liking pgvector better because of it being open source. The indexing algorithm is clear, one can understand and modify the parameters. Furthermore the database is postgresql, not a proprietary document store. When the other data in the problem is stored relationally, it is very convenient to have the vectors stored like this as well. And postgresql has good observability and metrics. I think when it comes to flexibility for specialized applications, pgvector seems like the clear winner. But I can definitely see pinecone's appeal if vector search is not a core component of the problem/business, as it is very easy to use and scales very easily

The Spring AI project aims to streamline the development of applications that incorporate artificial intelligence functionality without unnecessary complexity. On this example we use features like: Embedding, Prompts, ETL and save all embedding on PGvector(Postgres Vector database)

Official GitHub repository of the pgvector extension

The pgvector extension adds vector similarity search capabilities to your PostgreSQL database. To use the extension, you have to first create it in your database. You can install the extension, by connecting to your database and running the CREATE EXTENSION command from the psql command prompt:

It’s about to get a lot better too. Pgvector now supports multi-threaded build

https://github.com/pgvector/pgvector/issues/409#issuecomment...

pgvector has you covered: https://github.com/pgvector/pgvector

You don't need a dedicated vector db, you can use pgvector.

You could maybe use Cube for euclidean space search, but you're better off using optimized algorithms for embedding space search.

https://github.com/pgvector/pgvector

PostgreSQL's pgvector extension is probably the most widely used SQL solution for storing and searching vector data today. The extension introduces a "vector" type specialized for storing high-dimensional vector data. It allows you to create vector indices (in "IVFFlat" or "HNSW" format for different indexing/searching performance tradeoffs) and leverage them to do various types of similarity searches.