Skip to main content

Filtered Vector Search

LICENSE Weaviate on Stackoverflow badge Weaviate issues on Github badge Weaviate version badge Weaviate total Docker pulls badge Go Report Card


Weaviate provides powerful filtered vector search capabilities, meaning that you can eliminate candidates in your "fuzzy" vector search based on individual properties. Thanks to Weaviate's efficient pre-filtering mechanism, you can keep the recall high - even when filters are very restrictive. Additionally, the process is efficient and has minimal overhead compared to an unfiltered vector search.

Post-Filtering vs Pre-Filtering

Systems that cannot make use of pre-filtering typically have to make use of post-filtering. This is an approach where a vector search is performed first and then some results are removed which do not match the filter. This leads to two major disadvantages:

  1. You cannot easily predict how many elements will be contained in the search, as the filter is applied to an already reduced list of candidates.
  2. If the filter is very restrictive, i.e. it matches only a small percentage of data points relative to the size of the data set, there is a chance that the original vector search does not contain any match at all.

The limitations of post-filtering are overcome by pre-filtering. Pre-Filtering describes an approach where eligible candidates are determined before a vector search is started. The vector search then only considers candidates that are present on the "allow" list.


Some authors make a distinction between "pre-filtering" and "single-stage filtering" where the former implies a brute-force search and the latter does not. We do not make this distinction, as Weaviate does not have to resort to brute-force searches, even when pre-filtering due to the its combined inverted index and HNSW index.

Efficient Pre-Filtered Searches in Weaviate

In the section about Storage, we have described in detail which parts make up a shard in Weaviate. Most notably, each shard contains an inverted index right next to the HNSW index. This allows for efficient pre-filtering. The process is as follows:

  1. An inverted index (similar to a traditional search engine) is used to create an allow-list of eligible candidates. This list is essentially a list of uint64 ids, so it can grow very large without sacrificing efficiency.
  2. A vector search is performed where the allow-list is passed to the HNSW index. The index will move along any node's edges normally, but will only add ids to the result set that are present on the allow list. The exit conditions for the search are the same as for an unfiltered search: The search will stop when the desired limit is reached and additional candidates no longer improve the result quality.

Recall on Pre-Filtered Searches

Thanks to Weaviate's custom HNSW implementation, which persists in following all links in the HNSW graph normally and only applying the filter condition when considering the result set, graph integrity is kept intact. The recall of a filtered search is typically not any worse than that of an unfiltered search.

The graphic below shows filters of varying levels of restrictiveness. From left (100% of dataset matched) to right (1% of dataset matched) the filters become more restrictive without negatively affecting recall on k=10, k=15 and k=20 vector searches with filters.

Recall for filtered vector search

Flat-Search Cutoff

Version v1.8.0 introduces the ability to automatically switch to a flat (brute-force) vector search when a filter becomes too restrictive. This scenario only applies to combined vector and scalar searches. For a detailed explanation of why HNSW requires switching to a flat search on certain filters, see this article in towards data science. In short, if a filter is very restrictive (i.e. a small percentage of the dataset is matched), an HNSW traversal becomes exhaustive. In other words, the more restrictive the filter becomes, the closer the performance of HNSW is to a brute-force search on the entire dataset. However, with such a restrictive filter, we have already narrowed down the dataset to a small fraction. So if the performance is close to brute-force anyway, it is much more efficient to only search on the matching subset as opposed to the entire dataset.

The following graphic shows filters with varying restrictiveness. From left (0%) to right (100%), the filters become more restrictive. The cut-off is configured at ~15% of the dataset size. This means the right side of the dotted line uses a brute-force search.

Prefiltering with flat search cutoff

As a comparison, with pure HNSW - without the cutoff - the same filters would look like the following:

Prefiltering with pure HNSW

The cutoff value can be configured as part of the vectorIndexConfig settings in the schema for each class separately.

Cachable Filters

Starting with v1.8.0, the inverted index portion of a filter can be cached and reused - even across different vector searches. As outlined in the sections above, pre-filtering is a two-step process. First, the inverted index is queried and potential matches are retrieved. This list is then passed to the HNSW index. Reading the potential matches from disk (step 1) can become a bottleneck in the following scenarios:

  • when a very large amount of IDs match the filter or
  • when complex query operations (e.g. wildcards, long filter chains) are used

If the state of the inverted index has not changed since the last query, these "allow lists" can now be reused.


Even with the filter portion from cache, each vector search is still performed at query time. This means that two previously unseen vector searches can still make use of the cache as long as they use the same filter.


# search 1
where: {
operator: Equal
path: ["publication"]
valueString: "NYT"
nearText: {
concepts: ["housing prices in the western world"]

# search 2
where: {
operator: Equal
path: ["publication"]
valueString: "NYT"
nearText: {
concepts: ["where do the best wines come from?"]

The two semantic queries have very little relation and most likely there will be no overlap in the results. However, because the scalar filter (publication==NYT) was the same on both it can be reused on the second query. This makes the second query as fast as an unfiltered vector search.

Performance of vector searches with cached filters

The following was run single-threaded (i.e. you can add more CPU threads to increase throughput) on a dataset of 1M objects with random vectors of 384d with a warm filter cache.

Please note that each search uses a completely unique (random) search vector, meaning that only the filter portion is cached, but not the vector search portion, i.e. on count=100, 100 unique query vectors were used with the same filter.

Performance of filtered vector search with caching


Wildcard filters show considerably worse performance than exact match filters. This is because - even with caching - multiple rows need to be read from disk to make sure that no stale entries are served when using wildcards. See also "Automatic Cache Invalidation" below.

Automatic Cache Invalidation

The cache is built in a way that it cannot ever serve a stale entry. Any write to the inverted index updates a hash for the specific row. This hash is used as part of the key in the cache. This means that if the underlying inverted index is changed, the new query would first read the updated hash and then run into a cache miss (as opposed to ever serving a stale entry). The cache has a fixed size and entries for stale hashes - which cannot be accessed anymore - are overwritten when it runs full.

More Resources

If you can't find the answer to your question here, please look at the:

  1. Frequently Asked Questions. Or,
  2. Knowledge base of old issues. Or,
  3. For questions: Stackoverflow. Or,
  4. For issues: Github. Or,
  5. Ask your question in the Slack channel: Slack.