Hi Michael, The docs range could vary in extremes from few 10s to tens-of-thousands and in very heavy usage cases, 100k and above… in a single segment
Filtered Hnsw like you said uses a single graph.., which could be better if designed as sub-graphs On Mon, 2 Jun 2025 at 5:42 PM, Michael Sokolov <msoko...@gmail.com> wrote: > How many documents do you anticipate in a typical sub range? If it's in the > hundreds or even low thousands you would be better off without hnsw. > Instead you can use a function score query based on the vector distance. > For larger numbers where hnsw becomes useful, you could try using filtered > hnsw, but this will be using a single graph constructed from all of the > documents. > > On Mon, Jun 2, 2025, 5:25 AM Ravikumar Govindarajan < > ravikumar.govindara...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > We use index-sorting to arrange segment data. The ord-ranges for any > given > > KnnVectorField is mutually exclusive > > > > Ex: > > field: content > > > > OrdRange -> 0-100 (User1) > > OrdRange -> 101-300 (User2) > > and so on.. > > > > Each OrdRange has to be a self-contained Hnsw graph with all neighbours > > strictly inside the given OrdRange. A sub-graph, to be precise.. The > > generated segment will contain a lot of these sub-graphs but without any > > neighbour links to each other at Level-0. Level-1 and above can have > > cross-links, which should be fine.. > > > > Searches will be based on OrdRange and should stop once the sub-graph is > > fully explored and not cross over to other sub-graphs.. > > > > I can index them as different fields but it could run into a few hundreds > > (if not thousands). > > > > Are there any strategies I can adopt to accomplish this? Can a custom > > VectorScoringFunction solve this? (Like -> assign actual score, if ords > are > > in range. Assign 0, if out-of-range etc..) > > > > Is this the correct way of looking at the problem? > > > > Any help is much appreciated > > > > Regards, > > Ravi > > >
