-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.1k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[Draft] Support Multi-Vector HNSW Search via Flat Vector Storage #14173
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
Ran some early benchmarks to compare this flat storage based multi-vector approach with the existing parent-join approach. I would appreciate any feedback on the approach, benchmark setup, or any mistakes you spot along the way. Observations:
... Note that ParentJoin v/s MultiVector (on multi-vector branch)# multivector
recall latency (ms) nVectors nDoc topK fanout maxConn beamWidth quantized index s index docs/s num segments index size (MB) vec disk (MB) vec RAM (MB)
0.673 3.548 10000 103 100 50 32 100 no 1.62 63.58 1 29.40 29.297 29.297
0.431 4.857 100000 1323 100 50 32 100 no 11.42 115.84 3 294.08 292.969 292.969
0.461 8.034 200000 2939 100 50 32 100 no 22.62 129.92 6 588.27 585.938 585.938
0.496 16.040 500000 8773 100 50 32 100 no 53.50 163.98 14 1470.72 1464.844 1464.844
# parentJoin on multi-vector branch
# (merges disabled, creates and loads multivector config)
recall latency (ms) nVectors nDoc topK fanout maxConn beamWidth quantized index s index docs/s num segments index size (MB) vec disk (MB) vec RAM (MB)
0.610 4.644 10000 10103 100 50 32 100 no 1.70 5946.44 1 29.51 29.297 29.297
0.242 5.189 100000 101323 100 50 32 100 no 11.34 8935.80 3 295.17 292.969 292.969
0.275 8.988 200000 202939 100 50 32 100 no 22.54 9005.50 6 590.51 585.938 585.938
0.290 16.605 500000 508773 100 50 32 100 no 52.70 9654.32 14 1476.26 1464.844 1464.844 ... ParentJoin (on main) v/s MultiVector (on multivector branch)# parentJoin (on main)
recall latency (ms) nDoc topK fanout maxConn beamWidth quantized index s index docs/s force merge s num segments index size (MB) vec disk (MB) vec RAM (MB)
0.958 1.160 10000 100 50 32 100 no 1.49 6706.91 1.85 1 29.67 29.297 29.297
0.925 2.392 100000 100 50 32 100 no 34.98 2858.86 7.86 1 297.91 292.969 292.969
0.914 2.972 200000 100 50 32 100 no 63.80 3134.94 43.48 1 596.14 585.938 585.938
0.904 4.292 500000 100 50 32 100 no 151.49 3300.57 147.08 1 1491.81 1464.844 1464.844
# multivector
recall latency (ms) nVectors nDoc topK fanout maxConn beamWidth quantized index s index docs/s num segments index size (MB) vec disk (MB) vec RAM (MB)
0.673 3.793 10000 103 100 50 32 100 no 1.59 64.78 1 29.40 29.297 29.297
0.431 4.572 100000 1323 100 50 32 100 no 11.22 117.87 3 294.08 292.969 292.969
0.461 7.681 200000 2939 100 50 32 100 no 22.38 131.32 6 588.27 585.938 585.938
0.496 16.292 500000 8773 100 50 32 100 no 54.10 162.17 14 1470.72 1464.844 1464.844 ... ParentJoin with merges v/s ParentJoin with merges disabled (both on main)# parentJoin (on main)
recall latency (ms) nDoc topK fanout maxConn beamWidth quantized index s index docs/s force merge s num segments index size (MB) vec disk (MB) vec RAM (MB)
0.958 1.160 10000 100 50 32 100 no 1.49 6706.91 1.85 1 29.67 29.297 29.297
0.925 2.392 100000 100 50 32 100 no 34.98 2858.86 7.86 1 297.91 292.969 292.969
0.914 2.972 200000 100 50 32 100 no 63.80 3134.94 43.48 1 596.14 585.938 585.938
0.904 4.292 500000 100 50 32 100 no 151.49 3300.57 147.08 1 1491.81 1464.844 1464.844
## parentJoin on main (merge disabled):
recall latency (ms) nDoc topK fanout maxConn beamWidth quantized index s index docs/s force merge s num segments index size (MB) vec disk (MB) vec RAM (MB)
0.440 1.297 10000 100 50 32 100 no 1.76 5694.76 2.03 1 29.67 29.297 29.297
0.692 2.596 100000 100 50 32 100 no 11.35 8807.47 29.76 1 297.86 292.969 292.969
0.530 3.173 200000 100 50 32 100 no 22.03 9077.71 67.91 1 596.24 585.938 585.938
0.598 4.368 500000 100 50 32 100 no 53.20 9398.50 204.29 1 1493.26 1464.844 1464.844 |
I wonder if you are comparing vector IDs correctly? Looking at the "merges enabled/disabled" it doesn't make sense to me as one would be better than the other as both are then force-merged into a single segment. I also don't understand the recall change between parentJoin on main vs. parentJoin in your branch. That is a significant difference, which seems like there is a bug in the test runner or in the code itself. These numbers indeed confuse me. Maybe there is a bug in sparse vector index handling? |
I like where this PR is going.
I think this PR is still doing globally unique ordinals for vectors? So, vectors Models like ColPALI (and ColBERT) will index 100s or as much as 1k vectors per document. This will cause the number of vectors per lucene segment to be restricted to 2-20M, much lower than it is now. |
Another take at #12313
The following PR adds support for independent multi-vectors, i.e. scenarios where a single document is represented by multiple independent vector values. The most common example for this, is the passage-vector search use case, where we create a vector for every paragraph chunk in the document.
Currently, Lucene only supports a single vector per document. Users are required to create parent-child relationships with the chunked vectors of a document, and call a
ParentBlockJoin
query to run passage vector search. This change allows indexing multiple vectors within the same document.Each vector is still assigned a unique int ordinal but multiple ordinals can now map to the same document. We use additional metadata to maintain the many-one ordToDoc mapping, and also quickly figure out the first indexed vector ordinal for a document (called baseOrdinal
(baseOrd)
). This gives us new APIs that fetch all vectors for a document, which can be used for faster scoring (as opposed to the child doc query in ParentJoin approach):Interface
The interface to use multi-vector values is quite simple now:
I was able to add a multi-vector benchmark to luceneutil to run this setup end to end. Will link results and a luceneutil PR in comments.
Pending Tasks:
This is an early draft to get some feedback, I have TODOs across the code for future improvements. Here are some big items pending:
ScoreMode.Avg
)__
Note: This change does not include dependent multi-valued vectors like ColBERT, where the multiple vectors must used together to compute similarity. It does however lay essential ground work which can subsequently be extended for this support.