179 questions
No questions match those filters.
One engineer argues RAG’s whole point is shipping a small model because knowledge lives outside the weights. Another says generative retrieval is where the field is going, and it pushes everything back inside. They can’t both be right. Adjudicate - then tell me what changes if the corpus grows from 10^6 to 10^8 chunks.
This is one of the questions in the full AI/ML interview bank. Pro unlocks all 1789 questions; Premium includes the same bank plus the highest daily Practice limit.
See plansThe two engineers are debating different parts of the storage stack. The core benefit of RAG is leaving the heavy document text (the payload) in an external database, allowing the generation model to remain small. Generative retrieval does not move the raw text back into model parameters; it only internalizes the search index (mapping queries to document IDs) into the weights. Thus, both viewpoints coexist cleanly.
However, scaling the corpus by 100x—from 1 million to 100 million chunks—causes generative retrieval to break along critical dimensions:
- Model Capacity: While query decoding time grows only logarithmically with identifier length, the parameter capacity dedicated per document drops by 100x, falling below the parameter density efficiency offered by quantized vector indexes.
- Rebuild Latency: Indexing updates that take 41 minutes for 10^6 chunks scale to ~68 hours for 10^8 chunks, destroying real-time maintenance and dynamic index updates.
At scale, pure generative retrieval becomes impractical for primary search. The production-grade design uses an external index for primary retrieval and scales parametric generative paths strictly as an additive candidate-generation channel.