Skip to content

[flat index] Flat Search Interface#983

Open
arkrishn94 wants to merge 22 commits intomainfrom
u/adkrishnan/flat-index
Open

[flat index] Flat Search Interface#983
arkrishn94 wants to merge 22 commits intomainfrom
u/adkrishnan/flat-index

Conversation

@arkrishn94
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@arkrishn94 arkrishn94 commented Apr 28, 2026

This PR introduces a trait interface and a light index to support brute-force search for providers that can be used as/are a flat-index. There is an associated RFC that walks through the interface and associated implementation in diskann as a new flat module.

Rendered RFC link.

Motivation

The repo has no first-class surface for brute-force search today. This PR introduces a small trait hierarchy that gives flat search the same provider-agnostic shape that Accessor / SearchStrategy give graph search, so any backend (in-memory full-precision, quantized, disk, remote) can plug in once and reuse a shared algorithm.

This allows implementations of algorithms - diverse search, knn search, range search, pre-filtered search - to live in the repo and let consumers only worry about defining the the data is accessed / provided; just like we do for graph search.

Important refactor

We start with an important refactor of BuildQueryComputer and its associated ElementRef<'a> that it acts on in diskann::providers.

HasElementRef - a new minimal shape trait

This zero-method traits was extracted so the streaming flat traits and the random-access Accessor can share their associated types without one inheriting from the other:

pub trait HasElementRef { type ElementRef<'a>; }

Accessor: HasId + HasElementRef, and the flat traits below depend on the same two pieces independently.

BuildQueryComputer<T> - shared query preprocessing

We split the trait in diskann::provider to into:

  1. a core trait that has the build_query_computer method and the QueryComputer associated type, and,
  2. a sub-trait titled DistancesUnordered that has the distances_unordered method.

This split allows both graph and flat indexes to require building of a computer without dragging in random access.

pub trait BuildQueryComputer<T>: HasElementRef {
    type QueryComputer: for<'a> PreprocessedDistanceFunction<Self::ElementRef<'a>, f32> + ...;
    type Error: StandardError;
    fn build_query_computer(&self, query: T) -> Result<Self::QueryComputer, Self::Error>;
}

Flat search - core components

The following trait and its subtrait are the core traits that define how a brute-force scan over the index is implemented.

OnElementsUnordered — the core scan

Implemented in flat/iterator.rs, this is a single (async) method that drives the entire scan via callback. Implementations choose iteration order, prefetching, and bulk reads. Algorithms only see (Id, ElementRef) pairs.

pub trait OnElementsUnordered: HasId + HasElementRef + Send + Sync {
    type Error: StandardError;

    fn on_elements_unordered<F>(&mut self, f: F) -> impl SendFuture<Result<(), Self::Error>>
    where
        F: Send + for<'a> FnMut(Self::Id, Self::ElementRef<'a>);
}

flat::DistancesUnordered<T> — fused scan + score

This subtrait of OnElementsUnordered fuses scanning with scoring - it takes in a QueryComputer in addition to the closure. The default body loops on_elements_unordered and calls evaluate_similarity on each element. Backends that can fuse retrieval with scoring can override it.

The computer type comes from the implementor's own BuildQueryComputer<T> impl, so the visitor produces the computer that drives its own scan.

flat::SearchStrategy<P, T> — the glue

Implemented in flat/strategy.rs. Mirrors graph::glue::SearchStrategy (disambiguated by module path) and simply creates a concrete type that implements the scan:

pub trait SearchStrategy<P, T>: Send + Sync where P: DataProvider {
    type Visitor<'a>: DistancesUnordered<T> where Self: 'a, P: 'a;
    type Error: StandardError;

    fn create_visitor<'a>(
        &'a self,
        provider: &'a P,
        context: &'a P::Context,
    ) -> Result<Self::Visitor<'a>, Self::Error>;
}

Strategies are stateless per-call config — constructed at the call site, used for one search and then dropped.

FlatIndex<P> — the top-level handle

Implemented in flat/index.rs, this is a thin 'static wrapper around a DataProvider. The search is implemented as:

  1. asks the strategy for a per-query visitor,
  2. builds the query computer from the visitor (BuildQueryComputer::build_query_computer),
  3. drives visitor.distances_unordered(&computer, ...) through a NeighborPriorityQueue,
  4. hands the survivors to a graph::glue::SearchPostProcess to write into the output buffer.

Note the SearchPostProcess bound: the same trait used by graph search!

FlatIterator + Iterated<I> — opt-in convenience

For backends that naturally expose element-at-a-time access, FlatIterator is a lending async iterator with a single next(). Iterated<I> wraps any FlatIterator and provides the OnElementsUnordered impl (and DistancesUnordered by inheritance) by looping over next() and reborrowing each element.

A backend opts in at exactly the right layer: bulk-friendly backends implement OnElementsUnordered directly; element-at-a-time backends implement FlatIterator and use Iterated for the rest.

@codecov-commenter
Copy link
Copy Markdown

codecov-commenter commented Apr 28, 2026

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 89.00763% with 72 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 89.47%. Comparing base (95b6593) to head (f338a83).
⚠️ Report is 8 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
diskann/src/flat/test/provider.rs 67.06% 55 Missing ⚠️
diskann/src/flat/iterator.rs 95.63% 10 Missing ⚠️
diskann/src/flat/test/cases/flat_knn_search.rs 93.97% 5 Missing ⚠️
diskann/src/flat/index.rs 98.00% 2 Missing ⚠️

❌ Your patch status has failed because the patch coverage (89.00%) is below the target coverage (90.00%). You can increase the patch coverage or adjust the target coverage.

Additional details and impacted files

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #983      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   89.51%   89.47%   -0.05%     
==========================================
  Files         460      467       +7     
  Lines       85424    86145     +721     
==========================================
+ Hits        76469    77074     +605     
- Misses       8955     9071     +116     
Flag Coverage Δ
miri 89.47% <89.00%> (-0.05%) ⬇️
unittests 89.31% <89.00%> (-0.05%) ⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
diskann-disk/src/search/provider/disk_provider.rs 90.89% <ø> (ø)
diskann-garnet/src/provider.rs 83.36% <ø> (ø)
...rc/inline_beta_search/encoded_document_accessor.rs 0.00% <ø> (ø)
...ilter/src/inline_beta_search/inline_beta_filter.rs 0.00% <ø> (ø)
...odel/graph/provider/async_/inmem/full_precision.rs 98.39% <ø> (ø)
...s/src/model/graph/provider/async_/inmem/product.rs 90.17% <ø> (ø)
...rs/src/model/graph/provider/async_/inmem/scalar.rs 92.78% <ø> (ø)
...src/model/graph/provider/async_/inmem/spherical.rs 88.13% <ø> (ø)
...ders/src/model/graph/provider/async_/inmem/test.rs 69.34% <ø> (ø)
...ers/src/model/graph/provider/async_/postprocess.rs 100.00% <ø> (ø)
... and 10 more

... and 18 files with indirect coverage changes

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@arkrishn94 arkrishn94 marked this pull request as ready for review April 28, 2026 16:02
@arkrishn94 arkrishn94 requested review from a team and Copilot April 28, 2026 16:02
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pull request overview

This PR introduces an RFC plus an initial “flat” (sequential scan) search surface in diskann, analogous to the existing graph/random-access search pipeline built around DataProvider/Accessor.

Changes:

  • Added an RFC describing the flat iterator/strategy/index abstraction and trade-offs.
  • Added a new diskann::flat module with FlatIterator, FlatSearchStrategy, FlatIndex::knn_search, and FlatPostProcess (+ CopyFlatIds).
  • Exported the new flat module from the crate root.

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 7 out of 7 changed files in this pull request and generated 9 comments.

Show a summary per file
File Description
rfcs/00983-flat-search.md RFC describing the design for sequential (“flat”) index search APIs.
diskann/src/lib.rs Exposes the new flat module publicly.
diskann/src/flat/mod.rs New module root + re-exports for the flat search surface.
diskann/src/flat/iterator.rs Defines the async lending iterator primitive FlatIterator.
diskann/src/flat/strategy.rs Defines FlatSearchStrategy to create per-query iterators and query computers.
diskann/src/flat/index.rs Implements FlatIndex and the brute-force knn_search scan algorithm.
diskann/src/flat/post_process.rs Defines FlatPostProcess and a basic CopyFlatIds post-processor.

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

Comment thread diskann/src/flat/index.rs Outdated
Comment thread diskann/src/flat/post_process.rs Outdated
Comment thread rfcs/00983-flat-search.md
Comment thread diskann/src/flat/strategy.rs Outdated
Comment thread diskann/src/flat/index.rs Outdated
Comment thread diskann/src/flat/index.rs
Comment thread rfcs/00983-flat-search.md
Comment thread rfcs/00983-flat-search.md Outdated
Comment thread rfcs/00983-flat-search.md
@arkrishn94 arkrishn94 changed the title [RFC] Flat Index Search [flat index] Flat Search Interface Apr 29, 2026
Comment thread diskann/src/flat/index.rs
Comment thread diskann/src/flat/iterator.rs Outdated
Comment thread diskann/src/lib.rs
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@hildebrandmw hildebrandmw left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks Aditya. Left a few general comments with some ideas on how we might improve our code sharing. In general, I'm not a fan of prefixing everything with Flat. We already have the flat module so flat::SearchStrategy reads fine to me as opposed to flat::FlatSearchStrategy, which is a little redundant.

Comment thread diskann/src/flat/iterator.rs Outdated
Comment thread diskann/src/flat/post_process.rs Outdated
Comment thread diskann/src/flat/strategy.rs Outdated
Comment thread diskann/src/flat/iterator.rs Outdated
Comment thread diskann/src/flat/index.rs Outdated
Comment thread diskann/src/flat/index.rs
/// - `context`: per-request context threaded through to the provider.
/// - `query`: the query.
/// - `output`: caller-owned output buffer.
pub fn knn_search<S, T, O, OB, PP>(
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We recently went through a whole thing of adding the Search trait to the graph index to avoid the proliferation of search methods on the index. We should probably do the same here.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ack, makes sense.

Comment thread diskann/src/flat/index.rs Outdated
Comment thread diskann/src/flat/iterator.rs Outdated
Self: 'a;

/// The error type yielded by [`Self::next`].
type Error: StandardError;
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

On error types, maybe consider ToRanked instead of the Into<ANNError> that StandardError implies? That said, the visitor pattern means the implementation can swallow non-critical errors on its own. So maybe not needed, for the visitor case. But on the iterator case, a ToRanked might be a good idea.

Comment thread diskann/src/flat/mod.rs
//! family. It is designed for backends whose natural access pattern is a one-pass scan over
//! their data — for example append-only buffered stores, on-disk shards streamed via I/O,
//! or any provider where random access is significantly more expensive than sequential.
//!
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is a nice description comparing traits that enable algorithms based on random access vs sequential scans. Could this be in a higher level directory, either in providers.rs file or in diskann/src/agents.md

Comment thread rfcs/00983-flat-search.md Outdated


### The glue: `FlatSearchStrategy`

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Since we are introducing substantial new machinery, can we think about whether we can reuse some of this for IVF/SPANN type of indices that rely on clustering and then scanning entire data in specific clusters to support queries.

I can imagine that the OnElementsUnordered and DistancesUnordered could be adapted to the scope of a cluster.

And SearchStrategies for IVF would need to be added.

Even if we dont have a fully fleshed our proposal for clustering based indices, it would be ideal to document how the abstractions can be reused or adapted in the near future and avoid another set of abstractions for clustering based indices

Comment thread rfcs/00983-flat-search.md
5. Return search stats.

Other algorithms (filtered, range, diverse) can be added later as additional methods on
`FlatIndex`.
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

How would we support predicates on flat index?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

it's a good point - type-1 bitmap filters can be supported by extending the scan trait (DistancesUnordered) with a typed predicate applied before computing distances. This can then be wired through at the top-level search API depending on whether we're doing brute-force or filtered search.

Comment thread diskann/src/flat/mod.rs Outdated
//! | [`crate::provider::Accessor`] | [`FlatIterator`] |
//! | [`crate::graph::glue::SearchStrategy`] | [`FlatSearchStrategy`] |
//! | [`crate::graph::glue::SearchPostProcess`] | [`FlatPostProcess`] |
//! | [`crate::graph::Search`] | [`FlatIndex::knn_search`] |
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This table is very useful.
Could this description be upleveled to diskann/src/agents.md or readme.

Comment thread diskann/src/flat/mod.rs Outdated
//! # Hot loop
//!
//! Algorithms drive the scan via [`FlatIterator::next`] (lending iterator) or override
//! [`FlatIterator::on_elements_unordered`] when batching/prefetching wins. The default
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is this paragraph supposed to be here. Seems a bit out of place.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Agreed, I need to clean up.

Comment thread diskann/src/flat/post_process.rs Outdated
provider::HasId,
};

/// Post-process the survivor candidates produced by a flat search and
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is the intention to support filters with post_process? If so where is the clause?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Post-processing for flat is now common with diskann::graph::glue::SearchPostProcess. So filter will have to live in the object implementing this trait like in the graph case - e.g. inline_beta_filter. Or it can live in the Visitor<'_> itself.

@arrayka arrayka linked an issue May 5, 2026 that may be closed by this pull request
Comment thread diskann/src/flat/mod.rs Outdated
//!
//! The module mirrors the layering used by graph search:
//!
//! | Graph (random access) | Flat (sequential) | Shared? |
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Consider adding Responsibility column and provide one-sentence description for each layer.

pub trait DistancesUnordered<T>: OnElementsUnordered + BuildQueryComputer<T> {
/// Drive the entire scan, scoring each element with `computer` and invoking `f` with
/// the resulting `(id, distance)` pair.
fn distances_unordered<F>(
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The algorithm only needs DistancesUnordered. Making it a supertrait of OnElementsUnordered forces all distance-capable providers to also expose raw element streaming, which leaks a lower-level capability and may block implementations that can compute distances without exposing element refs.

Could we decouple the traits and provide a blanket impl of DistancesUnordered for OnElementsUnordered + BuildQueryComputer instead:

Make DistancesUnordered independent, and provide a separate adapter/blanket impl when OnElementsUnordered is available. Conceptually:

  • trait DistancesUnordered<T> { fn distances_unordered(...) ... } (no supertrait)
  • impl<T, S> DistancesUnordered<T> for S where S: OnElementsUnordered + BuildQueryComputer<T> { ... }

That keeps the algorithm-facing surface minimal, preserves encapsulation, and still keeps the convenience default behavior for types that do implement OnElementsUnordered.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

  • I'm a little confused; how would we define DistancedUnordered without the BuildQueryComputer trait bound?Specifically, the computer signature in the definition of distances_unordered. If possible, can you flesh this out a bit?
  • On your suggestion, if we implement the default implementation on any S : OnElementsUnordered + BuildQueryComputer then we won't allow a consumer to specialize the implementation for their S no?

I'm not sure I'm following why we might want to have implementations of DistancesUnordered that don't implement OnElementsUnordered :)

Comment thread diskann/src/flat/iterator.rs
Comment thread diskann/src/flat/index.rs Outdated
.into_ann_result()?;

let computer =
BuildQueryComputer::build_query_computer(&visitor, query).into_ann_result()?;
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Could you please provide an example of why visitor is needed to build a query computer?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@arkrishn94 arkrishn94 May 6, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Couple reasons -

  1. visitor implements DistancesUnordered so it is not unreasonable it should know how to construct the correct type to apply the streaming distance computation.
  2. Making the visitor implement DistancesUnordered has the advantage of being symmetric to the graph case: where the search_accessor implements ExpandBeam which must implement BuildQueryComputer<T>. This symmetry helps a bit with sharing the post-process trait SearchPostProcess for both graph and flat search - since trait bounds are identical for both paths.

type Id = u32;
}

impl provider::HasElementRef for Accessor<'_> {
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

As an option, consider extracting this prerequisite change into a separate PR to keep this one smaller and easier to review.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yeah, I'm open to separating this change to a pre-cursor PR.

My only worry is that, since this refactor is specific to enabling the new flat search trait structure I'm proposing here, I don't want to rush the refactor in an earlier PR only to change the flat search trait architecture.

/// brute-force ground-truth oracle.
#[derive(Debug, Clone)]
pub(crate) struct KnnOracleRun {
/// Top-`k` `(id, distance)` pairs in canonical `(distance asc, id asc)` order.
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Minor: shouldn't id be in the first position: (distance asc, id asc).

Comment thread diskann/src/flat/index.rs
/// many concurrent searches on a multi-threaded runtime, each producing the
/// correct top-k independently.
#[tokio::test(flavor = "multi_thread", worker_threads = 4)]
async fn knn_search() {
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I would name the test something like this: flat_index_supports_multi_threading

self.items.is_empty()
}

/// Distance metric the provider was constructed with.
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why does data provider (which responsibility is to provide data vectors) care about the distance metric?
Why is data provider defining the allowed distance metric?

}

/// Snapshot of the per-provider counters.
pub fn metrics(&self) -> Metrics {
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Minor: Metrics is a little bit confusing with Metric. Consider renaming Metrics to Counters to avoid confusion.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Create RFC and initial implementation for flat-index search support

6 participants