3 ms·
I’m interested in building a locally ran app. Is qdrant appropriate for that? Is it like SQLite where there is little overhead for doing a server less implement
by J_Shelby_J 3y ago
I’m interested in building a locally ran app. Is qdrant appropriate for that? Is it like SQLite where there is little overhead for doing a server less implementation?
- iansinnott 3y agoWould also be curious. Wondering what the state of the art is for local vector stores. i.e. the sqlite of vector stores.
- kacperlukawski 3y agoIf you will be the only app user, then the Python SDK's local mode might be suitable. However, in the long run, when you decide to publish the app, you rather have to switch to an on-premise or cloud environment. Using Qdrant from the very beginning might be a good idea, as the interfaces are kept the same, and the switch is seamless. Local mode: https://github.com/qdrant/qdrant-client#local-mode https://github.com/qdrant/qdrant-client#local-mode
- zzleeper 3y agoI was in that spot a few weeks ago. My requirements were not huge but a) I was on Windows and b), didn't want to waste too much time setting it up. Tried a few DBs that didn't work well (e.g. I think it was ChromaDB that didn't support Python 3.12) and ended up picking LanceDB. Very simple onboarding (just built on top of parquet) but there are a few rough edges. Curious how it compares with qdrant for non-crazy problems
- kacperlukawski 3y agoI'm unsure if there is any comparison of LanceDB and Qdrant available out there, but there shouldn't be any issues with Python 3.12 and qdrant-client compatibility. Windows is also not a problem, as the typical local setup is usually based on Docker. Are there any specific features you are interested in?