Live data from Hacker News

Postgres vs. Pinecone

lantern.dev

1–10 of 20 posts

Re: Postgres vs. Pinecone

#5
Vector dbs are quickly becoming a commodity. This was not true when pinecone was founded and received its first few rounds of funding.

At this point, Postgres has clearly caught up and the VCs are going to do everything it takes to hold on.

Re: Postgres vs. Pinecone

#6
post #5

Vector dbs are quickly becoming a commodity. This was not true when pinecone was founded and received its first few rounds of funding. At this point, Postgres has clearly caught up and the VCs are going to do everything it takes to hold on.

Vectors seem like kinda the easiest thing to store in a lot of ways

Re: Postgres vs. Pinecone

#7
post #5

Vector dbs are quickly becoming a commodity. This was not true when pinecone was founded and received its first few rounds of funding. At this point, Postgres has clearly caught up and the VCs are going to do everything it takes to hold on.

Pinecone just put devops around facebooks FAISS library

Re: Postgres vs. Pinecone

#10

Indexing in Postgres is legitimately painful, I don’t think “get moar ram” is a good response to that particular critique.

Neither is it a good demonstration of things that people who currently maintain postgres are experienced in doing. Companies should be reluctant to manage their own vector indexes until this becomes more a more mainstream skillset.

This excellent blog post[1] demonstrates the complexities of scaling HNSW indexes and shows that at a certain point, you need to switch to ivfpq with vastly different performance and accuracy characteristics.

https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/big-data/choose-the-k-nn-algori...

Post reply on HN