-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 483
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
Adding blog post to show performance improvements in vector search #3219
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Vijayan Balasubramanian <[email protected]>
@pajuric Can you review this PR? Thanks |
@VijayanB I'll review next week. |
- technical-posts | ||
- search | ||
meta_keywords: concurrent segment search, search concurrency, vector search, k-NN | ||
meta_description: With concurrent segment search enabled, vector search brings 60% improvements in service time by just utilizing additional 25-35% of CPU. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Please update the meta with the following:
meta_keywords: concurrent segment search, OpenSearch vector search, shard optimization, k-NN
meta_description: The concurrent segment search feature in OpenSearch optimizes CPU usage and enhances vector search performance by executing queries in parallel across multiple segments within a shard.
Signed-off-by: Fanit Kolchina <[email protected]>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@kolchfa-aws @VijayanB @pajuric Editorial review complete. Please see my changes and let me know if you have any questions. Thanks!
Co-authored-by: Nathan Bower <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: kolchfa-aws <[email protected]>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM
@nateynateynate @krisfreedain - Blog is ready to go. Can you update it to today's date - 2024-8-27 |
<th></th> | ||
<th></th> | ||
<th></th> | ||
<th>p50</th> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
can we include something like P50(in ms)
in other places wherever we are displaying service time number?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@VijayanB - Fanit is going to make the edit - but you need to let her know exactly what you want this to be, please.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@VijayanB Actually, if you look at the rendered form, you don't need the (ms) because the p50, p90, p99 are under a common heading "Service time (ms)"
Publish date -> today.
Description
Adding blog post to show performance improvements in vector search
Issues Resolved
#3174
Check List
By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the BSD-3-Clause License.