Prompt

How do I set up vector search for a RAG app?

Technology / Databases1 observationLast seen Oct 7, 2026

Latest observation

Oct 7, 2026OpenAI APIWeb search: off

To set up vector search for a RAG app, you need four main pieces:

  1. Document ingestion
  2. Chunking + embedding
  3. Vector storage + retrieval
  4. LLM generation with retrieved context

Here’s a practical setup.


1) Ingest your data

Collect the documents you want your app to answer questions from, such as:

  • PDFs
  • web pages
  • Markdown / text files
  • database records
  • support tickets
  • internal docs

You’ll want to normalize them into plain text with metadata like:

  • source
  • title
  • URL
  • date
  • section/page
  • access permissions

Metadata matters because it helps with filtering, citations, and debugging.


2) Chunk the documents

Don’t embed huge documents as one block. Split them into smaller chunks.

Typical chunking:

  • Chunk size: 300–1,000 tokens
  • Overlap: 50–150 tokens

Good chunking practices:

  • Keep chunks semantically coherent
  • Prefer splitting by headings/paragraphs over arbitrary token cuts
  • Preserve metadata for each chunk
  • Avoid chunks that are too tiny or too large

Example:

Document -> sections -> paragraphs -> chunks

3) Create embeddings

Convert each chunk into a vector using an embedding model.

Popular embedding options:

  • OpenAI embeddings
  • Cohere embeddings
  • Sentence Transformers
  • Voyage / Jina / Mistral embeddings

For each chunk, store:

  • chunk text
  • embedding vector
  • metadata

Example flow:

embedding = embed_model.encode(chunk_text)

4) Store vectors in a vector database

You need a place to index and search embeddings.

Popular vector stores:

  • FAISS — local, simple, fast
  • Pinecone — managed, scalable
  • Weaviate — vector DB + metadata filtering
  • Milvus — open-source, scalable
  • Qdrant — strong metadata filtering, easy to use
  • Chroma — good for prototypes

When storing, use:

  • vector
  • chunk text
  • metadata
  • unique ID

5) Retrieve relevant chunks at query time

When a user asks a question:

  1. Embed the query
  2. Search the vector DB for nearest chunks
  3. Return top-k results

Usually:

  • top-k = 3 to 10
  • optionally use metadata filters
  • optionally rerank results with a cross-encoder or LLM reranker

Example:

query_vec = embed_model.encode(user_query)
results = vector_db.search(query_vec, top_k=5)

6) Build the RAG prompt

Pass the retrieved chunks into the LLM as context, along with the user question.

A simple prompt structure:

You are a helpful assistant. Answer only using the context below.

Context:
[chunk 1]
[chunk 2]
[chunk 3]

Question:
[user question]

Best practices:

  • Include source citations
  • Tell the model to say “I don’t know” if context is insufficient
  • Keep the context window within model limits
  • Use only the most relevant chunks

7) Add reranking and filtering

Basic vector search is often good, but for better quality:

Reranking

After retrieving top 10–20 chunks, rerank them with:

  • a cross-encoder
  • an LLM-based reranker
  • relevance scoring

Filtering

Use metadata filters:

  • document type
  • date range
  • user permissions
  • language
  • tenant/customer ID

This improves precision and security.


8) Evaluate and tune

Measure retrieval quality and answer quality.

Track:

  • recall@k
  • precision@k
  • answer correctness
  • citation accuracy
  • hallucination rate

Tune:

  • chunk size
  • overlap
  • embedding model
  • top-k
  • reranking
  • metadata filters

Simple architecture

Documents
   -> text extraction
   -> chunking
   -> embedding
   -> vector DB

User query
   -> query embedding
   -> vector search
   -> rerank
   -> prompt assembly
   -> LLM answer

Minimal example with FAISS-like flow

from sentence_transformers import SentenceTransformer
import faiss
import numpy as np

model = SentenceTransformer("all-MiniLM-L6-v2")

chunks = [
    "RAG combines retrieval and generation.",
    "Vector search finds semantically similar text.",
    "Chunking improves retrieval quality."
]

embeddings = model.encode(chunks, normalize_embeddings=True)
embeddings = np.array(embeddings).astype("float32")

index = faiss.IndexFlatIP(embeddings.shape[1])
index.add(embeddings)

query = "How does vector search help RAG?"
q_emb = model.encode([query], normalize_embeddings=True).astype("float32")

scores, ids = index.search(q_emb, k=2)
for i in ids[0]:
    print(chunks[i])

Recommended stack for a production RAG app

A common setup:

  • Parsing: Unstructured, Apache Tika, custom loaders
  • Chunking: custom or LangChain/LlamaIndex
  • Embeddings: OpenAI / Cohere / Voyage / Sentence Transformers
  • Vector DB: Qdrant, Pinecone, Weaviate, or Milvus
  • Reranking: Cohere rerank, bge-reranker, or custom
  • LLM: GPT-4.1 / Claude / Gemini / local model
  • Orchestration: LangChain, LlamaIndex, or your own code

Key best practices

  • Use high-quality chunking
  • Store good metadata
  • Tune top-k and chunk size
  • Add reranking for better relevance
  • Filter by permissions if needed
  • Log retrieval results for debugging
  • Keep embeddings and vector DB in sync with source docs

If you want, I can also give you:

  1. a production-ready architecture diagram,
  2. a Python implementation with Qdrant or Pinecone, or
  3. a step-by-step setup using LangChain/LlamaIndex.

Observation history

How did Obsurfable measure this prompt?

Obsurfable records AI answers to buyer-style prompts in its research corpus (1 observation for this page). Metrics are distributions over observations, not a single static ranking.

Which AI systems does Obsurfable collect answers from?

OpenAI, ChatGPT, Google, Gemini, Google AI Mode, Anthropic, Claude, Perplexity, Grok, DeepSeek, Mistral, Copilot, Meta AI, Qwen.

How can brands improve their AEO?

Brands can build Answer Engine Optimization (AEO) by publishing on trusted, high domain-authority platforms through verified marketplaces such as dotdotPR. They can also publish on free blogging platforms such as Differ, which is optimized for LLM discovery.

Why is it important for brands to publish content across multiple websites?

Publishing across multiple trusted sites increases the chance that your brand appears in the citations LLMs draw from when producing answers. Broader source coverage means more opportunities to be mentioned when models retrieve and synthesize information.

Want this interpreted for your brand?

Explorer is the free public corpus. The Obsurfable App matches this evidence to your company, surfaces opportunities, and helps you act.