[HN Gopher] Indexing 100M vectors in 20 minutes on PostgreSQL wi...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Indexing 100M vectors in 20 minutes on PostgreSQL with 12GB RAM
        
       Author : gaocegege
       Score  : 74 points
       Date   : 2025-12-08 17:30 UTC (5 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (blog.vectorchord.ai)
 (TXT) w3m dump (blog.vectorchord.ai)
        
       | duckbot3000 wrote:
       | Kinda makes you wonder why you need cloud for anything besides
       | remote encrypted backups if you can run all that on 12GB
        
         | setr wrote:
         | Because getting any hardware out of infra-team on premise is
         | utterly miserable, across the board.
        
           | lelanthran wrote:
           | That's not the only alternative.
           | 
           | Rent your VPS and add in extra volumes for like $10 per
           | 100GB.
        
             | Imustaskforhelp wrote:
             | Funny thing but netcup has $10 per 1 TB
             | 
             | Netcup is under-rated but there are also other providers
             | too at lowendbox/lowendtalk and I am interested to try out
             | hetzner too sometime.
        
               | benjiro wrote:
               | And if you want to go even cheaper, check out Hetzner
               | their EX63 (go to custom) > 4x 7.68TB drives for like 140
               | Euro.
               | 
               | Not counting the fact that Netcup is raided (also Netcup
               | is limited to 8TB on a VPS).
               | 
               | That is like 4.7 Euro /TB. That is like 4$/TB. 6 Euro /
               | TB in a raid 5 setup.
               | 
               | I do not understand why they are not using this new
               | pricing model on their older servers. There the best you
               | can get is like 10 Euro /TB (for the single 15TB U.2).
        
         | riku_iki wrote:
         | what about failover story if server dies? PG failover setup is
         | complicated, and cloud infra handles this for you.
        
           | positron26 wrote:
           | Do we mean managed or PG on K8s like CNPG? In all cases, I
           | use the infra to simplify things like having disk redundancy
           | and failover nodes, not because 12GB is interesting.
        
             | riku_iki wrote:
             | Primary managed PG, since you still need
             | setup/maintenance/monitoring on your K8S own solution.
        
           | logifail wrote:
           | (Genuine question) What's your current plan for when your
           | cloud provider goes offline? Do you have a failover story, or
           | it a case of "wait for them to come back online"?
        
             | riku_iki wrote:
             | I have backups on different cloud provider, so I could
             | bootstrap db if provider goes dark indefinitely.
             | 
             | But realistically, I believe major clouds (google, aws)
             | likely has more robust org and infra for recovery than I
             | can built and maintain.
        
           | tjwebbnorfolk wrote:
           | What are you willing to pay for cloud-native failover?
           | 
           | Not every use case requires 100% uptime
        
             | riku_iki wrote:
             | Sure, but those who require (99% of major businesses) are
             | ready to pay.
        
           | benjiro wrote:
           | https://github.com/multigres/multigres ... when its complete.
           | From the guy that made Vitess for Mysql.
           | 
           | And yes, i agree, the PG failover setup (and especially
           | dealing with a failure afterwards, to restore the ex-master
           | is beyond infuriating).
           | 
           | But its not pay 10x the amount, while eating easily 10x
           | performance infuriating :)
        
       | nwellinghoff wrote:
       | Too bad aws does not support any of these other vector extensions
       | in managed rds.
        
       | ayende wrote:
       | That suffer from a serious issue
       | 
       | You must have the data upfront, you cannot build this in an
       | incremental fashion
       | 
       | There is also bo mention on how this would handle updates, and
       | from the description, even if updates are possible, this will
       | degrade over time, requiring new indexing batch
        
       | esafak wrote:
       | How does it compare with paradedb and lancedb?
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-12-13 23:01 UTC)