HackerReposA FIELD GUIDE TO OPEN SOURCE
ProSponsor the shelf♧ 0
← Back to top all-time
run-llama
llama_index
Python2023–2024
run-llama / llama_index

llama_index

LlamaIndex is the document processing platform for AI

36Distinct people
44Mentions
0Explicit recommenders
52.9KGitHub stars
REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

LlamaIndex is the document processing platform for AI

GitHub

Where it is used

No documented product use was verified in the last source check.

What people are saying

No recommendation phrase was found in the indexed comments.

No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.

Also in these discussions

Mentioned in the same Hacker News threads. That is not proof they are substitutes.

This week on Hacker News

Nov 7–Nov 14 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/14/2026, 5:04:57 PM UTC.

No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.

Mentions over time

HN mentions by month44 dated mentions

Observed mentions: 2023-01-08 10:29:26 UTC to 2024-05-22 22:27:49 UTC.

0510152023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2023-02-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 16 mentions; 5 submissions, 11 commentsJan 20232023-02-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2023-03-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 2 mentions; 0 submissions, 2 comments2023-03-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2023-04-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 6 mentions; 0 submissions, 6 comments2023-04-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2023-05-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 4 mentions; 2 submissions, 2 comments2023-05-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2023-06-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 3 mentions; 1 submissions, 2 comments2023-06-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2023-07-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2023-07-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2023-08-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2023-08-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2023-09-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 3 mentions; 0 submissions, 3 comments2023-09-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2023-10-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 commentsSep 20232023-10-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2023-11-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 1 submissions, 0 comments2023-11-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2023-12-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2023-12-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-02-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 2 mentions; 1 submissions, 1 comments2024-02-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-03-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2024-03-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-04-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 1 submissions, 0 comments2024-04-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-05-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 2 mentions; 1 submissions, 1 comments2024-05-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-06-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 commentsMay 2024

Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.

View mention counts and date ranges
UTC ranges include their start and exclude their end. Select a period to filter the source evidence.
PeriodStart (UTC)End (exclusive, UTC)MentionsSubmissionsComments
Jan 20232023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2023-02-01 00:00:00 UTC16511
Feb 20232023-02-01 00:00:00 UTC2023-03-01 00:00:00 UTC202
Mar 20232023-03-01 00:00:00 UTC2023-04-01 00:00:00 UTC606
Apr 20232023-04-01 00:00:00 UTC2023-05-01 00:00:00 UTC422
May 20232023-05-01 00:00:00 UTC2023-06-01 00:00:00 UTC312
Jun 20232023-06-01 00:00:00 UTC2023-07-01 00:00:00 UTC101
Jul 20232023-07-01 00:00:00 UTC2023-08-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Aug 20232023-08-01 00:00:00 UTC2023-09-01 00:00:00 UTC303
Sep 20232023-09-01 00:00:00 UTC2023-10-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Oct 20232023-10-01 00:00:00 UTC2023-11-01 00:00:00 UTC110
Nov 20232023-11-01 00:00:00 UTC2023-12-01 00:00:00 UTC101
Dec 20232023-12-01 00:00:00 UTC2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101
Jan 20242024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2024-02-01 00:00:00 UTC211
Feb 20242024-02-01 00:00:00 UTC2024-03-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Mar 20242024-03-01 00:00:00 UTC2024-04-01 00:00:00 UTC110
Apr 20242024-04-01 00:00:00 UTC2024-05-01 00:00:00 UTC211
May 20242024-05-01 00:00:00 UTC2024-06-01 00:00:00 UTC101

What Hacker News says

44 sources
Partially agree. Vector DBs are critical components in retrieval systems. What most applications need are retrieval systems, rather than building blocks of retrieval systems. That doesn't mean the building blocks are not important. As someone working on vector DB, I find many users struggling in building their own retrieval systems with building blocks such as embedding service (openai,cohere), logic orchestration framework (langchain/llamaindex) and vector databases, some even with reranker models. Putting them together is not as easy as it looks. A fairly changeling system work. Letting alone quality tuning and devops. The struggle is no surprise to me, as tech companies who are experts on this (google,meta) all have dedicated teams working on retrieval system alone, making tons of optimizations and develop a whole feedback loop of eval
Read the rest
uating and improving the quality. Most developers don't get access to such resource. No one size fits all. I think there shall exist a service that democratize AI-powered retrieval, in simple words the know-how of using embedding+vectordb and a bunch of tricks to achieve SOTA retrieval quality. With this idea I built a Retrieval-as-a-service solution, and here is its demo: https://github.com/milvus-io/bootcamp/blob/master/bootcamp/R... Or using it in LlamaIndex: https://github.com/run-llama/llama_index/blob/main/docs/exam... Curious to learn your thoughts.
In Build a search engine, not a vector DB
I'm sorry but from a _practical_ standpoint, it feels like mostly fluff. Someone was advertising today on a HN hiring post that they would create a basic chatbot for a specific set of documents for $15,000. This feels like the type of web page that person would use to confuse a client into thinking that was a fair price. Practically speaking the starting point should be things like the APIs such as OpenAI or open source frameworks and software. For example, llama_index https://github.com/jerryjliu/llama_index. You can use something like that or another GitHub repo built with it to create a customized chatbot application in a few minutes or a few days. (It should not take two weeks and $15,000). It would be good to see something detailed that demonstrates an actual use case for fine tuning. Also, I don't believe that the academic tests ar
Read the rest
e appropriate in that case. If you really were dead set on avoiding a leading edge closed LLM, and doing actual fine-tuning, you would want a person to look at the outputs and judge them in their specific context such as handling customer support requests for that system.
In Patterns for building LLM-based systems and products

Showing the 15 most recent of 44 sources. Enable JavaScript to search and browse every indexed mention.

MAKE YOURSELF AT HOME

A few shortcuts

/
Search the collection
?
Open this guide
Esc
Close dialogs and navigation

Your saved repositories and interests stay in this browser.