| 1 |
| 0 |
| Match Graph | 0 | 0 |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| Capabilities | 14 decomposed | 9 decomposed |
| Times Matched | 0 | 0 |
Executes approximate nearest neighbor search directly within application memory using Hierarchical Navigable Small World (HNSW) graph indexes, eliminating network latency and external server dependencies. Implements multi-layer graph traversal with configurable M (max connections) and ef (search expansion factor) parameters to balance recall vs latency tradeoffs. Supports both dense and sparse vector embeddings within a single collection, with native handling of variable-dimension vectors through the zvec_core search engine.
Unique: Builds on Alibaba's battle-tested Proxima vector search engine with CPU Auto-Dispatch that automatically selects optimal SIMD kernels (AVX-512 VNNI, AVX2, SSE) at runtime based on hardware capabilities, eliminating manual optimization and ensuring consistent performance across heterogeneous deployments
vs alternatives: Faster than Milvus or Weaviate for single-machine deployments because it eliminates network overhead and gRPC serialization, while maintaining production-grade recall through tuned HNSW parameters inherited from Proxima's Alibaba-scale deployments
Combines dense vector similarity search with structured scalar filters (e.g., date ranges, categorical tags) through a unified SQL query engine that optimizes filter pushdown and index selection. The query planner analyzes predicates to determine whether to apply filters before (pre-filter) or after (post-filter) vector search, minimizing irrelevant vector comparisons. Supports complex boolean expressions on metadata fields while maintaining vector search semantics through the zvec_db layer's query interface.
Unique: Implements a cost-based query planner that estimates filter selectivity and vector search cost to automatically decide pre-filter vs post-filter strategies, avoiding the manual tuning required by simpler systems that always apply filters in a fixed order
vs alternatives: More flexible than Pinecone's metadata filtering because it supports arbitrary boolean expressions and optimizes filter placement, while simpler than Elasticsearch because it avoids the overhead of maintaining separate inverted indexes for scalar fields
Accepts multiple vectors and metadata in a single batch operation, buffering them in memory until a configurable threshold (e.g., 100k vectors) is reached, then automatically flushing to a new segment. Batch insertion amortizes the cost of segment creation and metadata updates across multiple vectors, improving throughput compared to single-vector inserts. The flush operation is asynchronous; queries can proceed while new segments are being written to disk.
Unique: Implements automatic segment flushing based on configurable thresholds, enabling efficient bulk loading without manual segment management, while supporting asynchronous flushing that allows queries to proceed during writes
vs alternatives: More efficient than single-vector inserts because it amortizes segment creation overhead, while simpler than manual segment management because flushing is automatic and transparent to the application
Provides an abstraction layer for embedding functions that can be registered with a collection, enabling automatic embedding computation during insertion and query. Supports pluggable re-rankers that post-process search results using alternative similarity metrics (e.g., cross-encoder models) to improve ranking quality. Re-rankers are applied transparently after vector search, trading ~10-50% latency overhead for improved result quality.
Unique: Provides a pluggable embedding function abstraction that enables automatic embedding computation during insertion and optional re-ranking during queries, allowing teams to experiment with different embedding models and re-ranking strategies without modifying application code
vs alternatives: More flexible than hardcoded embedding models because it supports pluggable functions, while more efficient than external embedding services because embeddings can be computed locally during indexing
Executes queries in parallel across multiple segments, with each segment searched independently and results merged at the end. The query executor uses thread pools to parallelize segment searches, enabling multi-core utilization for large collections with many segments. Concurrent queries on different collections do not block each other; read-write conflicts are avoided through segment immutability.
Unique: Implements segment-level parallelism where each segment is searched independently by a thread pool worker, enabling multi-core utilization without lock contention, while result merging is optimized for top-k queries to avoid materializing all candidates
vs alternatives: More scalable than single-threaded search because it utilizes multiple cores, while simpler than distributed search because parallelism is within a single process and requires no network communication
Stores index segments as binary files on disk with memory-mapped access, enabling efficient loading of large indexes without copying data into memory. Segment files include metadata headers (vector count, dimension, index type, quantization parameters) followed by index data. Memory-mapped access allows the OS to page segments in/out based on access patterns, enabling indexes larger than physical RAM. Checksums protect against corruption.
Unique: Uses memory-mapped file access to enable efficient loading of indexes larger than physical RAM, with automatic OS-level paging and checksums for data integrity, eliminating the need to copy entire indexes into memory
vs alternatives: More memory-efficient than in-memory databases (Milvus, Weaviate) for very large indexes because memory-mapped access allows OS paging, while more durable than pure in-memory systems because indexes are persisted to disk with checksums
Compresses vector embeddings using Rotation-Aware Bit Quantization (RaBitQ) to reduce memory footprint and accelerate distance computations, then re-ranks top-k candidates using original full-precision vectors to recover recall lost during quantization. The quantization pipeline learns rotation matrices per segment to align high-variance dimensions, enabling 8-16x compression while maintaining >95% recall. Re-ranking is applied transparently during query execution, trading ~5-10% latency overhead for dramatic memory savings.
Unique: Applies rotation-aware learning per segment to align high-variance dimensions before quantization, then transparently re-ranks with original vectors during query execution, achieving compression ratios comparable to product quantization while maintaining simpler parameter tuning
vs alternatives: More memory-efficient than unquantized HNSW (8-16x compression vs 1x) while maintaining higher recall than simple scalar quantization, and requires less manual tuning than product quantization because rotation matrices are learned automatically per segment
Provides three index types optimized for different recall-latency-memory tradeoffs: HNSW for balanced performance on medium-scale datasets (millions of vectors), IVF (Inverted File) for very large-scale datasets (billions of vectors) with coarse quantization, and Flat (brute-force) for small datasets or when 100% recall is required. The schema definition allows specifying index type and parameters (e.g., HNSW M=16, IVF nlist=1000) per collection, with automatic index selection based on dataset size heuristics if not explicitly configured.
Unique: Supports three distinct index algorithms within a unified API, allowing users to swap index types by changing schema configuration without application code changes, and provides offline local_builder tool for pre-computing IVF indexes on large datasets before deployment
vs alternatives: More flexible than Faiss (which requires manual index selection and parameter tuning) because it abstracts index complexity behind a simple schema interface, while more performant than single-index systems because it allows optimal index selection per use case
+6 more capabilities
Executes SQL queries against Supabase PostgreSQL instances through the Model Context Protocol, translating natural language or structured query requests into parameterized SQL statements. Uses MCP's tool-calling interface to expose database operations as callable functions with schema validation, enabling LLM agents to perform CRUD operations, joins, and aggregations with automatic connection pooling and credential management through Supabase client SDK.
Unique: Exposes Supabase PostgreSQL as MCP tools with automatic credential injection from Supabase client SDK, eliminating manual connection string management and enabling seamless LLM-to-database queries within Claude or compatible agents
vs alternatives: Tighter integration than generic SQL MCP servers because it leverages Supabase's built-in authentication and connection pooling rather than requiring separate database credential configuration
Exposes Supabase Auth session state and user metadata through MCP tools, allowing agents to inspect current authentication context, retrieve user profiles, and trigger auth-related operations. Integrates with Supabase's JWT-based auth system to validate sessions and access user claims without re-authenticating, using the Supabase client's built-in session management.
Unique: Integrates Supabase's JWT-based auth system directly into MCP tool interface, allowing agents to inspect and act on auth state without managing separate credential stores or re-authentication flows
vs alternatives: More seamless than generic auth MCP servers because it leverages Supabase's built-in session management and avoids redundant credential passing between agent and auth system
Invokes Supabase Edge Functions (serverless TypeScript/JavaScript functions) through MCP tools, passing parameters and receiving results with optional streaming support. Uses Supabase's edge function HTTP API to trigger functions with automatic authentication headers and response parsing, enabling agents to execute custom business logic without embedding it in the agent itself.
zvec scores higher at 44/100 vs Supabase at 42/100.
Need something different?
Search the match graph →© 2026 Unfragile. Stronger through disorder.
Unique: Exposes Supabase Edge Functions as MCP tools with automatic authentication and response parsing, allowing agents to invoke custom serverless logic without managing HTTP clients or credential injection
vs alternatives: More integrated than generic HTTP MCP tools because it handles Supabase-specific authentication, error handling, and response formatting automatically
Subscribes to real-time changes on Supabase tables through MCP's event streaming interface, using Supabase's PostgreSQL LISTEN/NOTIFY mechanism to push INSERT, UPDATE, and DELETE events to agents. Maintains persistent WebSocket connections and filters events by table and row-level policies, enabling agents to react to database changes without polling.
Unique: Bridges Supabase's PostgreSQL LISTEN/NOTIFY real-time system with MCP's tool interface, enabling agents to subscribe to database changes without managing WebSocket connections or event serialization
vs alternatives: More efficient than polling-based approaches because it uses Supabase's native real-time infrastructure rather than repeated database queries
Manages files in Supabase Storage buckets through MCP tools, supporting upload, download, list, and delete operations with automatic authentication and path-based access control. Uses Supabase's S3-compatible storage API with built-in support for public/private buckets and signed URLs for temporary access, enabling agents to handle file I/O without managing cloud storage credentials.
Unique: Exposes Supabase Storage's S3-compatible API as MCP tools with automatic authentication and signed URL generation, eliminating the need for agents to manage cloud storage credentials or generate temporary access tokens
vs alternatives: More integrated than generic S3 MCP tools because it leverages Supabase's built-in bucket policies and authentication rather than requiring separate AWS credentials
Performs semantic similarity searches on vector embeddings stored in Supabase PostgreSQL using pgvector extension, translating natural language queries into embedding vectors and executing cosine/L2 distance searches. Integrates with embedding providers (OpenAI, Cohere) or uses pre-computed embeddings, enabling agents to retrieve semantically similar documents or records without full-text search limitations.
Unique: Integrates pgvector directly into MCP tools with automatic embedding generation and distance calculation, enabling agents to perform semantic search without managing separate vector database infrastructure
vs alternatives: More efficient than external vector databases (Pinecone, Weaviate) for Supabase users because it colocates embeddings with relational data, reducing network latency and simplifying data synchronization
Exposes Supabase database schema information through MCP tools, allowing agents to discover table structures, column types, constraints, and relationships without manual schema documentation. Queries PostgreSQL information_schema and Supabase metadata tables to dynamically generate schema descriptions, enabling agents to construct valid queries and understand data relationships.
Unique: Queries Supabase's PostgreSQL information_schema directly through MCP tools, enabling agents to dynamically discover and adapt to database schemas without pre-configured schema definitions
vs alternatives: More flexible than static schema definitions because it reflects live database state, including recent migrations or schema changes
Enforces Supabase Row-Level Security policies within agent queries, ensuring that agents can only access rows permitted by RLS rules defined in the database. Evaluates policies based on authenticated user context (JWT claims, user ID) and applies WHERE clause filters automatically, preventing unauthorized data access at the database layer rather than application layer.
Unique: Delegates authorization enforcement to PostgreSQL RLS policies rather than implementing authorization in agent code, ensuring that data access rules are centralized and cannot be bypassed by agent logic
vs alternatives: More secure than application-level authorization because RLS is enforced at the database layer, preventing accidental data leaks even if agent code has bugs
+1 more capabilities