Defining pgvector and OpenSearch

OpenSearch and pgvector are two open source solutions that offer vector database capabilities, but they cater to different use cases and environments.

pgvector

pgvector is an open source extension for PostgreSQL that introduces support for vector data types and operations directly within the database. It allows developers to store, index, and query high-dimensional data such as embeddings generated from machine learning models.

Key aspects of pgvector include:

  • Integration: An extension for PostgreSQL, providing seamless integration with existing PostgreSQL databases.
  • Ease of use: Simple to set up and use for those familiar with SQL and PostgreSQL.
  • Focus: Primarily focused on efficient vector similarity search within a relational database context.
  • Scalability: Well-suited for small to medium-sized vector datasets and scenarios where extensive scaling demands are not present.
  • Cost-effectiveness: Cost-effective for users already leveraging PostgreSQL.

OpenSearch

OpenSearch is an open source search and analytics engine for applications requiring fast, scalable, and flexible text search functionality. Originating as a fork of Elasticsearch 7.10 after Elastic changed its software licensing, OpenSearch is maintained primarily by Amazon Web Services but developed collaboratively by a broad community.

Key aspects of OpenSearch include:

  • Architecture: A distributed, scalable search and analytics suite, including vector database capabilities.
  • Capabilities: Offers search capabilities beyond just vector search, including full-text search, log monitoring, and data visualization with OpenSearch Dashboards.
  • Scalability: Excels in managing large volumes of data and is designed for high-performance, large-scale deployments.
  • Complexity: Generally has higher setup and maintenance complexity due to its distributed nature.
  • Cost: Potentially higher costs due to the need for distributed infrastructure.

Key differences and considerations include:

Scale: pgvector is suitable for moderate datasets, while OpenSearch is built for large-scale data and high-performance search.
Functionality: pgvector focuses on vector similarity search, whereas OpenSearch provides a broader suite of search and analytics features.
Integration: pgvector integrates directly with PostgreSQL, while OpenSearch is a standalone solution that can integrate with various data sources.
Complexity: pgvector offers simpler setup and management, while OpenSearch requires more expertise for deployment and maintenance.

pgvector vs. OpenSearch: The key differences

1. Architecture

OpenSearch is built around a distributed architecture to scale horizontally and handle vast amounts of data efficiently. It utilizes a cluster of nodes, where data is divided into shards and each shard can have replicas for fault tolerance and high availability.

This allows OpenSearch to scale as more nodes are added to the cluster, ensuring performance does not degrade as the data size grows. Nodes in an OpenSearch cluster can take on different roles, such as master nodes for cluster management or data nodes that handle the actual storage and querying of data.

The architecture of OpenSearch is optimized for distributed full-text search and analytics. It uses Lucene for indexing and searching text data, which allows it to support full-text search capabilities, including text analyzers, tokenizers, and filters. OpenSearch’s distributed nature means that queries are processed in parallel across multiple nodes, ensuring fast response times even when querying large datasets.

pgvector is an extension to PostgreSQL, a relational database that adds support for vector data types. PostgreSQL itself follows a more centralized model where all data is typically stored on a single node, though it can be scaled horizontally using features like replication and partitioning.

Unlike OpenSearch, which is distributed from the outset, pgvector leverages PostgreSQL’s existing relational model, keeping vector data alongside structured data like integers, strings, or timestamps. This makes it suitable for applications that require both traditional relational data handling and machine learning-powered vector queries.

PostgreSQL’s extensibility allows pgvector to integrate vector-based queries directly into SQL queries, benefiting from PostgreSQL’s features like acid compliance, transaction management, and integrated security. However, scaling PostgreSQL for massive datasets, particularly for vector-based searches, can be more complex compared to OpenSearch, which is designed from the ground up for distributed systems.

2. Features and flexibility

OpenSearch provides an extensive set of features, especially suited for search, log analytics, and real-time data processing. It supports a range of search features such as full-text search, faceted search, aggregations, highlighting, and geospatial queries. It is also commonly used for log and event data processing. Its integration with OpenSearch Dashboards allows users to create visualizations and dashboards to monitor and analyze data.

OpenSearch provides support for alerting, machine learning (for anomaly detection), index management, and security features like authentication and access control. Its plugin system enables additional capabilities, including integration with alerting systems, security plugins, and even third-party tools for additional data processing and visualization.

pgvector is more specialized in handling high-dimensional vector data. With this extension, PostgreSQL users can store and manipulate vectors directly inside the database, enabling functionalities such as nearest neighbor search and custom distance metrics (e.g., cosine similarity, Euclidean distance). This makes pgvector particularly useful for AI applications that store vectors representing document embeddings, image features, or high-dimensional data.

While pgvector provides support for vector similarity search, it lacks the search features (such as faceting, highlighting, or full-text search) that OpenSearch provides. It focuses more on integrating machine learning features with relational data, while OpenSearch is more feature-complete for large-scale search and data analytics.

3. Performance and scalability

OpenSearch is designed to handle large-scale search and analytics. Its distributed architecture allows it to horizontally scale by adding more nodes to the cluster. This means that, as the volume of data increases, OpenSearch can handle the additional load by distributing queries and indexing across multiple nodes. Each shard can be distributed across different machines, allowing for parallel query execution and increasing throughput.

When it comes to performance, OpenSearch’s distributed system allows it to perform well with large amounts of unstructured data, particularly for use cases like log analysis and search indexing. The trade-off is that managing such a distributed system can be more complex. Administrators need to monitor the health of the nodes, optimize indexing strategies, and manage shard distribution to maintain performance.

pgvector, being an extension to PostgreSQL, does not have native distributed support like OpenSearch. PostgreSQL is designed as a centralized system, and while it can scale vertically (by increasing hardware resources) and horizontally through techniques like partitioning or replication, it is not as efficient at scaling horizontally as OpenSearch.

While pgvector performs well for moderate-sized vector data and can leverage PostgreSQL’s existing infrastructure, handling extremely large datasets (e.g., billions of vectors) can require extra management, such as manual sharding and partitioning.

Additionally, pgvector supports approximate nearest neighbor (ANN) search algorithms to speed up vector searches, but these methods may not be as optimized for large-scale, high-dimensional vector searches as specialized engines like Faiss or Annoy, which are often used in machine learning applications.

4. Complexity

OpenSearch’s distributed architecture adds complexity to its setup and management. Configuring a cluster involves setting up multiple nodes, managing shards, replicas, and optimizing query performance for large datasets. Admins need to ensure proper monitoring, node health, and resource allocation. Indexing and query tuning can be challenging, especially when working with large-scale datasets.

Despite these complexities, OpenSearch offers a flexible system once properly configured. However, the learning curve can be steep for those new to distributed systems or large-scale data analytics platforms.

pgvector is easier to deploy for users already familiar with PostgreSQL, as it extends the database without changing its core architecture. It allows for vector operations while still using the familiar PostgreSQL query language (SQL), making it easier to integrate into existing systems. It does not require the complex cluster management that OpenSearch demands.

However, pgvector’s features are more limited when it comes to large-scale search and analytics, as it relies on PostgreSQL’s features rather than a purpose-built distributed architecture for handling big data.

5. Cost and deployment

OpenSearch is open source, so there are no licensing fees. However, running OpenSearch at scale can incur significant infrastructure costs, especially when deploying in a production environment. Due to its distributed nature, you need a cluster of machines to handle the load, with costs scaling with the number of nodes. For enterprises, there are managed services like Amazon OpenSearch Service that simplify deployment but at an added cost.

Setting up an OpenSearch cluster involves configuring the right balance of nodes, shards, and replicas to ensure scalability and performance. The operational cost increases with the need for redundancy, backup, and performance optimization. Additionally, you need resources for maintenance and monitoring to ensure the cluster runs smoothly.

pgvector, being an extension of PostgreSQL, is usually less expensive to deploy initially. Many businesses already use PostgreSQL for structured data storage, so adding pgvector to an existing database system is less costly in terms of infrastructure. However, for large-scale vector search, the costs can increase if the system needs to scale out significantly, requiring more hardware resources or a distributed PostgreSQL solution.

Additionally, while PostgreSQL itself is free, managed PostgreSQL services like Amazon RDS for PostgreSQL come at a cost, and scaling PostgreSQL may still involve higher operational overhead than OpenSearch in cases of very large vector datasets.

Tips from the expert

Anil Inamdar

Anil Inamdar

Director, Professional Services

Anil has 20+ years of experience in data and analytics roles. Joining Instaclustr in 2019, he works with organizations to drive successful data-centric digital transformations via the right cultural, operational, architectural, and technological roadmaps. Before Instaclustr, he held data & analytics leadership roles at Dell EMC, Accenture, and Visa.

In my experience, here are tips that can help you better evaluate and leverage pgvector and OpenSearch for vector search applications:

  1. Pair pgvector with materialized views for hybrid search: Use materialized views in PostgreSQL to precompute and store hybrid scores combining structured filters and vector similarity, boosting performance in applications like personalized recommendations.
  2. Use OpenSearch’s reranking pipeline for hybrid semantic+keyword search: Combine OpenSearch vector search with BM25 full-text scoring in a two-phase query. First, retrieve candidates via ANN, then rerank with textual relevance—ideal for improving precision in content-heavy domains.
  3. Run HNSW benchmarking in both environments: pgvector and OpenSearch both support HNSW indexing. Benchmark each under your workload (vector dimensionality, concurrency, recall needs) to guide hyperparameter tuning like ef_search and M.
  4. Use PostgreSQL extensions like pg_partman with pgvector: To manage vector datasets that grow over time (e.g., time-series embeddings), combine pgvector with pg_partman for partitioning by time or content type, ensuring manageable query scopes.
  5. Index only important subspaces in high-dimensional vectors: When using pgvector for embeddings with many dimensions, consider projecting or hashing vectors to a subspace with PCA or product quantization before indexing to balance accuracy and speed.

OpenSearch vs. pgvector: How to choose?

When deciding between OpenSearch and pgvector, consider the use case, data requirements, and scalability needs. Below are key considerations to guide your decision:

  • Data scale and complexity: Choose OpenSearch for large-scale, unstructured data, especially when you need distributed, full-text search, log analysis, or high availability. Opt for pgvector if you are already using PostgreSQL and need to integrate machine learning features such as high-dimensional vector searches without extensive scaling.
  • Search features: OpenSearch excels in traditional search capabilities like faceted search, aggregations, highlighting, and full-text search. pgvector is more specialized for vector similarity searches and machine learning-driven applications but lacks advanced full-text search features.
  • Scalability needs: OpenSearch is better suited for large, distributed systems that require horizontal scaling across multiple nodes and data centers. pgvector is easier to set up but may require extra management for horizontal scaling, especially for extremely large datasets.
  • Integration with existing systems: pgvector can be a good choice if you’re already using PostgreSQL and want to integrate vector search within your existing relational database environment. OpenSearch is more appropriate if you’re building a dedicated search and analytics system, or need a separate platform for large-scale data processing.
  • Cost considerations: pgvector tends to be more cost-effective for small to medium-sized use cases, especially when you’re already on PostgreSQL. OpenSearch may incur higher infrastructure costs, especially when deployed at scale, due to its distributed nature.

Unlock the power of managed vector solutions

Instaclustr has long been recognized as a trusted provider of fully managed open source solutions, and its support for OpenSearch and PostgreSQL continues this legacy. Now, with the ability to seamlessly manage pgvector in PostgreSQL and vector search in OpenSearch, Instaclustr is empowering businesses to unlock new capabilities in data-driven applications, especially those that rely on artificial intelligence and machine learning.

pgvector, an extension for PostgreSQL, enables vector similarity search directly within a PostgreSQL database. This is vital for applications such as recommendation systems, image recognition, and natural language processing. By managing pgvector alongside PostgreSQL, Instaclustr simplifies the complex task of deploying and scaling vector search capabilities, ensuring businesses can focus on their data use cases without worrying about operational complexity. Customers can enjoy predictable performance, robust security, and the confidence of expert-backed support for their vector search needs.

On the other hand, Instaclustr’s solution for vector search in OpenSearch delivers cutting-edge capabilities for advanced search applications. OpenSearch, a popular choice for its flexibility and powerful search features, becomes even more dynamic with vector search. This enables businesses to index and query vector data, such as embeddings created by machine learning models, for high-quality search results in applications like e-commerce, personalization, and fraud detection. Instaclustr takes care of the infrastructure, monitoring, and scaling, ensuring optimal search performance while reducing operational burden.

Instaclustr’s managed approach provides in-house expertise to leverage the full potential of pgvector in PostgreSQL or vector search in OpenSearch. Users gain access to a reliable, highly available, and expertly maintained platform, delivering the confidence and freedom to innovate.

For more information: