Qdrant(@qdrant_engine)
Elastic's benchmark claims Qdrant is 7x slower on disk search. They never enabled the two features b...
6.6内容质量
TL;DR · AI 摘要
Qdrant on X: "Elastic's benchmark claims Qdrant is 7x slower on disk search. They never enabled the two features built f...
核心要点
- 主题聚焦：Elastic's benchmark claims Qdrant is 7x slower o
- 来源：Qdrant(@qdrant_engine)，建议结合原文判断细节。
- AI 分析暂不可用，本条为保底评分与摘要。
#AI#云计算
打开原文Qdrant on X: "Elastic's benchmark claims Qdrant is 7x slower on disk search. They never enabled the two features built for that workload. We turned them on and found 2x throughput, half the latency, 1/3 the compute. Read more: https://t.co/cS9wmDgG6i" / X
Qdrant
@qdrant_engine
Elastic's benchmark claims Qdrant is 7x slower on disk search. They never enabled the two features built for that workload. We turned them on and found 2x throughput, half the latency, 1/3 the compute. Read more:
qdrant.tech/blog/benchmark…
Elastic
@elastic
Jul 1
7x higher vector search throughput at comparable recall. Elasticsearch 9.4.1 DiskBBQ vs Qdrant 1.18.1, tested on network-attached persistent storage. The storage topology most K8s and managed-cloud deployments actually run on. Not local NVMe. The gap is disk access. DiskBBQ
Show more
4:25 PM · Jul 8, 2026
1.6K
Views
4
1
9
19
3
Read 4 replies