5 comments

  • ricw 5 hours ago
    I’ve been using this since early this year and it’s been great. It was what convinced me to just stick to Postgres rather than using a dedicated vector db.

    Only working with 100m or so vectors, but for that it does the job.

    • pqdbr 4 hours ago
      Are you using a dedicated pg instance for vector or you keep all your data in a single pg instance (vector and non-vector)?
      • ComputerGuru 4 hours ago
        The biggest selling point to using Postgres over qdrant or whatever is that you can put all the data in the same db and use joins and ctes, foreign keys and other constraints, lower latency, get rid of effectively n+1 cases, and ensure data integrity.
        • dalberto 3 hours ago
          I generally agree that one database instance is ideal, but there are other reasons why Postgres everywhere is advantageous, even across multiple instances:

          - Expertise: it's just SQL for the most part - Ecosystem: same ORM, same connection pooler - Portability: all major clouds have managed Postgres

          I'd gladly take multiple Postgres instances even if I lose cross-database joins.

          • throwaway7783 3 hours ago
            Yep. If performance becomes a concern, but we still want to exploit joins etc, it's easy to set up replicas and "shard" read only use cases across replicas.
      • ricw 1 hour ago
        All in one of course. That’s the biggest advantage. And why postgres is great - it covers virtually all standard use cases.
    • esafak 4 hours ago
      What kind of performance do you observe with what setup?
      • ricw 1 hour ago
        Depends on the query and I don’t have exact numbers of the top of my head, but we’re talking low 100ms range for something pgvector itself wasn’t able to handle in a reasonable amount of time.
  • aunty_helen 3 hours ago
    Related discussion for pgvector perf: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45798479
    • tacoooooooo 3 hours ago
      the main issue with pgvectorscale is that it's not available in RDS :(
      • mrinterweb 34 minutes ago
        I'm considering hosting a separate pg db just to be able to access certain extensions. I am interested in this extension as well as https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Incremental_View_Maintenanc... (also not available on RDS). Then use logical replication for specific data source tables (guess it would need to be DMS).
      • omg2864 2 hours ago
        Yes, RDS seems to really hold PG back on AWS, with all the interesting pg extensions getting released now (pg_lake). It is a share I can't move to other PG vendors because it is a pain in the ass to get all privacy, legal docs in order.
        • calderwoodra 50 minutes ago
          Yes, the InfoSec advantages of using RDS are very real, especially in B2B Enterprise SaaS.
  • jascha_eng 1 hour ago
    Combined with our other search extension for full text search these two extensions make postgres a really capable hybrid search engine: https://github.com/timescale/pg_textsearch
    • ldng 22 minutes ago
      I'm not how you'd combine the two; care to give us a quick outline ?
  • isoprophlex 3 hours ago
    The linked blogpost is an interesting read, too, comparing well-tuned pgvector to pinecone:

    https://www.tigerdata.com/blog/pgvector-vs-pinecone

  • mmmeff 3 hours ago
    This is still unsupported in RDS, right?