Postgres vs. Pinecone
lantern.dev
Postgres vs. Pinecone
1–10 of 20 posts
Re: Postgres vs. Pinecone
#2Re: Postgres vs. Pinecone
#3Re: Postgres vs. Pinecone
#4Re: Postgres vs. Pinecone
#5At this point, Postgres has clearly caught up and the VCs are going to do everything it takes to hold on.
Re: Postgres vs. Pinecone
#6Vector 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
#7Vector 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
#8Re: Postgres vs. Pinecone
#9Re: Postgres vs. Pinecone
#10Indexing in Postgres is legitimately painful, I don’t think “get moar ram” is a good response to that particular critique.
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...