Live data from Hacker News

Why AutoGPT engineers ditched vector databases

dariuszsemba.com

41–50 of 59 posts

Re: Why AutoGPT engineers ditched vector databases

#41
post #11

Is there any implementation of open source vector db that is fast enough to say create embedding of 100M documents locally within few hours and find ranked matches in under a second? I tried ChromaDb and it is super slow, basically unusable.

I do about 100 million embeddings using around 50 GPU instances and feed them into Qdrant. Takes about 12 hours. Very happy with the result and performance as long as you have the option to have a very large memory instance running.

Re: Why AutoGPT engineers ditched vector databases

#42
post #27
post #11

Is there any implementation of open source vector db that is fast enough to say create embedding of 100M documents locally within few hours and find ranked matches in under a second? I tried ChromaDb and it is super slow, basically unusable.

Generating the embeddings is by far the slowest part of that, but it’s embarrassingly parallel so if you have $ it can be done that quick. When I worked for Dubai airport, I was tasked with building a vector similarity search that was highly optimised for query speed, in the end I ended up holding the vectors in memory (in a numpy array) and using scipy to do cosine similarity, I could get about 1.2 million vectors p…

Actually if you set it up right it doesn't cost you anything more to do it if it's almost fully parallel. It doesn't matter if you paid for one GPU instance for 500 hours or 50 for 10 hours. The cost is about the same. You can also more confidently use spot pricing to reduce the cost.

Re: Why AutoGPT engineers ditched vector databases

#43

Summary: They stopped using vector databases because the performance benefit simply didn't matter compared to how long the LLMs took to respond, and you should focus on using technology to solve problems and not pick the trendy option. But that never got anyone promoted.

So it seems like they still use vectors - they just replaced the search (however that works) with a dot product operation? I mean from a vector point of view that makes total sense

Re: Why AutoGPT engineers ditched vector databases

#44

Has anyone ever managed to generate anything useful with AutoGPT? I had several attempts and apart from wasting some money for GPT-4 API calls, it's never produced anything usable. Whereas if I manually enter prompts in ChatGPT I can often produce simpler project from the beginning till the end, if I partition them into logically independent parts.

No. It always gets stuck on a wrong path and can’t get out

Re: Why AutoGPT engineers ditched vector databases

#45
post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't read the intermediate representation. The idea is that you use an LLM to summarize those comments into human readable text.

aw geez, now we have to compile docs, too?!

"Don't you have a machine that puts food into the mouth and pushes it down?"

--Khrushchev, satirically inquiring regarding the implausible number of labor-saving devices exhibited on the American side of the Kitchen Debate[1].

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitchen_Debate

Re: Why AutoGPT engineers ditched vector databases

#47
post #41
post #11

Is there any implementation of open source vector db that is fast enough to say create embedding of 100M documents locally within few hours and find ranked matches in under a second? I tried ChromaDb and it is super slow, basically unusable.

I do about 100 million embeddings using around 50 GPU instances and feed them into Qdrant. Takes about 12 hours. Very happy with the result and performance as long as you have the option to have a very large memory instance running.

Hello from Qdrant. Would like to hear more about your use case. If not yet connected. https://www.linkedin.com/in/zayarni

Re: Why AutoGPT engineers ditched vector databases

#48
post #25
post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's your assessment of the biggest blocking issues for something like this to be practically useful? From what I've seen of AutoGPT things seem to fall apart, in that the goals never quite seem to be achieved once anything more than basic research is requested.

It can do stuff, sort of, like helping me to create ; https://github.com/tudorw/Ai_MegaList/blob/main/AI_Sector_Br... After a lot of trial and error, I managed to keep it somewhat on track by using a CSV file, something like; "An expert manipulate .csv files, read the first URL from the first line, 2nd column of 'raw.csv', pass the URL to browse_website the questions 'summarize the activities, highlight any investmen…

Are you referring to Waggle Dance or AutoGPT?

Re: Why AutoGPT engineers ditched vector databases

#49
post #2

They are still using something like a vector DB when it is appropriate. It's just a very simple version built in to the system.

I wouldn't say that. It seems analogous to saying a program uses a simple version of a document-oriented database built in to the system when in truth it's just using dictionaries. Sure, conceptually they do kind of the same thing sometimes and you might even persist it to disk, but it's a bit of a stretch to call it "something like a DB" imo.
Post reply on HN