{"id":3944,"date":"2025-10-19T00:29:38","date_gmt":"2025-10-19T00:29:38","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/violethoward.com\/new\/abstract-or-die-why-ai-enterprises-cant-afford-rigid-vector-stacks\/"},"modified":"2025-10-19T00:29:38","modified_gmt":"2025-10-19T00:29:38","slug":"abstract-or-die-why-ai-enterprises-cant-afford-rigid-vector-stacks","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/violethoward.com\/new\/abstract-or-die-why-ai-enterprises-cant-afford-rigid-vector-stacks\/","title":{"rendered":"Abstract or die: Why AI enterprises can't afford rigid vector stacks"},"content":{"rendered":"


\n
<\/p>\n

Vector databases (DBs), once specialist research instruments, have become widely used infrastructure in just a few years. They power today's semantic search, recommendation engines, anti-fraud measures and gen AI applications across industries. There are a deluge of options: PostgreSQL with pgvector, MySQL HeatWave, DuckDB VSS, SQLite VSS, Pinecone, Weaviate, Milvus and several others.<\/p>\n

The riches of choices sound like a boon to companies. But just beneath, a growing problem looms: Stack instability. New vector DBs appear each quarter, with disparate APIs, indexing schemes and performance trade-offs. Today's ideal choice may look dated or limiting tomorrow.<\/p>\n

To business AI teams, volatility translates into lock-in risks and migration hell. Most projects begin life with lightweight engines like DuckDB or SQLite for prototyping, then move to Postgres, MySQL or a cloud-native service in production. Each switch involves rewriting queries, reshaping pipelines, and slowing down deployments.<\/p>\n

This re-engineering merry-go-round undermines the very speed and agility that AI adoption is supposed to bring.<\/p>\n

Why portability matters now<\/b><\/h2>\n

Companies have a tricky balancing act:<\/p>\n