Update choosing_vdb.md

docs/articles/choosing_vdb.md

@@ -1,6 +1,24 @@
 # A Practical Guide for Choosing a Vector Database: Considerations and Trade-Offs
 
-Choosing a vector database for large-scale AI or search applications is less about comparing feature checklists and more about understanding your system’s architecture and constraints. The goal is to pick a solution that aligns with your use case’s scale, performance needs, and operational limits. Below we explore key considerations ranging from prototyping vs. production to index design and query patterns so you can make an informed decision. This guide is created by Superlinked, who maintain the open Vector Database Comparison Table. For tailored technical guidance on your specific implementation, feel free to [learn more](https://getdemo.superlinked.com/?utm_source=vdb_table_article).
+Choosing a vector database for large-scale AI or search applications is less about comparing feature checklists and more about understanding your system’s architecture and constraints. The goal is to pick a solution that aligns with your use case’s scale, performance needs, and operational limits. 
+
+If you’re exploring what might work best for your use case or want to discuss different architecture choices, you can book a short technical chat using [this link](https://getdemo.superlinked.com/?utm_source=vdb_table_article).
+
+## An overview of key factors to compare when selecting a vector database
+
+
+| **Dimension**              | **Key Considerations**                                                                                                                                        | **Trade-Offs / Recommendations**                                                                                                                                                                                                             |
+| -------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
+| **Prototype → Production** | - In-process vs. standalone deployment<br>- Ephemeral vs. durable storage                                                                                     | - Use embedded/in-memory DBs for prototyping; migrate to managed or self-hosted clusters for production.<br>- Ephemeral (fast but volatile) vs. durable (persistent, reliable).                                                              |
+| **Workload Type**          | - Write-heavy vs. read-heavy access patterns<br>- Hybrid workloads                                                                                            | - Write-heavy: need async indexing, buffering, or real-time insert support.<br>- Read-heavy: pre-built indexes (HNSW, IVF) offer speed at higher memory cost.<br>- Hybrid: mix mutable "fresh" and static "main" indexes.                    |
+| **Memory vs. Disk**        | - In-memory vs. disk-backed indexing<br>- Sharding and scaling<br>- Metadata and payload size                                                                 | - In-memory = fastest but costly and limited.<br>- Disk-based = larger scale, slower but persistent.<br>- Hybrid (memory + disk) balances both.<br>- Store only embeddings in vector DB; offload large documents elsewhere.                  |
+| **Deployment Model**       | - Fully managed service vs. self-hosted<br>- In-process vs. standalone server                                                                                 | - Managed: minimal ops, faster deployment, higher cost & less control.<br>- Self-hosted: full control, cheaper at scale, higher ops burden.<br>- Start embedded → move to networked as system scales.                                        |
+| **Tenant Model**           | - Single-tenant vs. multi-tenant architecture                                                                                                                 | - Single-tenant: simpler, faster.<br>- Multi-tenant: cost-efficient but adds isolation and scaling complexity.<br>- Use namespaces/collections for isolation if needed.                                                                      |
+| **Query Features**         | - Metadata filters<br>- Hybrid (dense + sparse) search<br>- Multi-vector or mixture-of-encoders<br>- Specialized queries (geo, facets)                        | - Strong filtering support is critical for scalability.<br>- Hybrid search merges semantics + keywords.<br>- Multi-vector support or mixture-of-encoders simplifies multi-modal search.<br>- Few DBs support geo/faceted search natively.    |
+| **Indexing Strategy**      | - ANN vs. brute-force<br>- HNSW, IVF, PQ, LSH variants<br>- Index rebuild costs                                                                               | - ANN offers massive speed-up with small recall trade-off.<br>- Brute-force only for small datasets or accuracy-critical cases.<br>- Evaluate on latency-recall curve, not index name.<br>- Index rebuilds can be expensive - plan for them. |
+| **Operational Costs**      | - Expensive ops: index rebuilds, bulk inserts, unindexed filters, strict consistency<br>- Cheap ops: flat inserts, ANN queries, buffered writes, lazy deletes | - Avoid frequent rebuilds and unindexed filters.<br>- Use async writes and lazy deletes.<br>- ANN queries are efficient; design updates to be batched.                                                                                       |
+| **Decision Factors**       | - Scale & latency goals<br>- Operational capacity<br>- Required query features<br>- Acceptable trade-offs                                                     | - Focus on fit to architecture and constraints, not feature lists.<br>- No universal "best" DB - choose based on workload, ops tolerance, and cost.                                                                                           |
+
 
 ## From Prototype to Production Scale