Alternatives to Vector Databases for Code Context

Comparing ContextPacker to Pinecone, Chroma, Weaviate, and DIY RAG solutions. No indexing, same quality.

No vector DB required · Always fresh context · NDCG 0.92 quality

Quick Comparison

Solution Setup Time Infrastructure Freshness Quality Best For
ContextPacker 1 API call None Always fresh NDCG 0.92 Quick prototypes, multi-repo agents
Pinecone + Embeddings 2-4 hours Vector DB Manual sync NDCG 0.79 High-frequency queries, single repo
Chroma + Embeddings 1-3 hours Self-host or cloud Manual sync NDCG 0.79 Open-source preference
Weaviate + Embeddings 2-5 hours Vector DB Manual sync NDCG 0.79 Enterprise scale
Sourcegraph Days-weeks Enterprise deployment Real-time N/A Enterprise code search

Detailed Comparisons

ContextPacker vs Pinecone

Pinecone is a managed vector database. To use it for code context, you need to embed files, upload vectors, and query by similarity.

Choose ContextPacker if:
  • • You need results in under 5 seconds
  • • You're working across multiple repos
  • • You don't want to manage vector infrastructure
  • • You need context from private repos (branches, PRs)
  • • You're prototyping or building MVPs
Choose Pinecone if:
  • • You have >10K queries/day on a single repo
  • • You need sub-100ms query latency
  • • You already use Pinecone for other data
  • • You have a dedicated ML/infra team
Pinecone setup (simplified):
# 1. Embed all files
embeddings = openai.Embedding.create(input=file_contents)

# 2. Upload to Pinecone
index.upsert(vectors=embeddings)

# 3. Query
results = index.query(query_embedding, top_k=10)

# 4. Re-index on every code change
ContextPacker (one call):
context = httpx.post(
    "contextpacker.com/v1/packs",
    json={"repo_url": repo, "query": query}
).json()["markdown"]

ContextPacker vs Chroma

Chroma is an open-source vector database. Chroma Sync (Oct 2025) can auto-index GitHub repos, but still requires embeddings infrastructure.

Choose ContextPacker if:
  • • You want zero infrastructure (no Docker, no hosting)
  • • You need code-aware ranking (understands src/ vs tests/)
  • • You want results on first call (no pre-indexing)
  • • You're building a SaaS product (usage-based pricing)
Choose Chroma if:
  • • You prefer open-source solutions
  • • You have infra team to run Chroma server
  • • You're already using Chroma for other data
  • • You need full control over embedding models

Note: Chroma Sync requires initial indexing (30-120s) and re-indexing on code changes. ContextPacker works instantly on any commit/branch.

ContextPacker vs LangChain + Embeddings (DIY RAG)

Many developers build custom RAG with LangChain + OpenAI embeddings + Chroma/Pinecone. This works, but takes time.

⏱️ Time Comparison
DIY RAG setup:
  • • Clone repo: 1-5 min
  • • Parse files: 2-10 min
  • • Generate embeddings: 5-30 min
  • • Upload to vector DB: 2-5 min
  • • Write query logic: 30-60 min
  • Total: 2-4 hours first time
ContextPacker:
  • • Copy API key: 10 sec
  • • Make API call: 2-4 sec
  • Total: 15 seconds

ContextPacker = pre-built RAG pipeline as an API. Same quality, 500x faster setup.

ContextPacker vs Cursor API / Copilot API

Cursor, GitHub Copilot, and Windsurf have amazing codebase understanding — but they're IDE-only, not APIs.

Choose ContextPacker if:
  • • You're building an agent, not using an IDE
  • • You need context from repos you don't have locally
  • • You want to query any branch/PR programmatically
  • • You're building a product (PR bot, doc generator, etc.)
Use Cursor/Copilot if:
  • • You're a developer coding in an IDE
  • • You only need context from locally opened repos
  • • You want autocomplete + chat UI

Key difference: Cursor/Copilot are IDEs with embedded AI. ContextPacker is an API for building AI tools.

ContextPacker vs Sourcegraph

Sourcegraph is an enterprise code search platform. It indexes your entire org's codebase and provides powerful search.

Choose ContextPacker if:
  • • You need context for AI agent prompts
  • • You want simple API access
  • • You don't need full-text search UI
  • • You're a small team (not enterprise)
Choose Sourcegraph if:
  • • You need human-facing code search
  • • You have 100+ developers
  • • You want batch code migrations
  • • You have enterprise compliance needs

Different use cases: Sourcegraph = search UI for developers. ContextPacker = context API for AI agents.

Cost Comparison

Solution Monthly Cost Setup Cost (time) Total First Month
ContextPacker $9 $0 (15 sec) $9
Pinecone + OpenAI Embeddings ~$12 $200-400 (eng time) $212-412
Chroma (self-hosted) + Embeddings ~$15 $200-400 (eng time) $215-415
Sourcegraph Enterprise Contact sales $2000+ (deployment) $$$$$

Engineering time valued at $100/hour. Setup includes cloning, parsing, embedding, database setup, and query logic.

Decision Framework

Use ContextPacker if you're:
  • • Building an AI agent that needs codebase context
  • • Prototyping a coding assistant or documentation generator
  • • Working across multiple repos or need PR/branch-level context
  • • Solo founder or small team without dedicated infrastructure
  • • Doing <1000 queries/day (beyond that, embeddings cheaper per query)
Use Vector DB (Pinecone/Chroma/Weaviate) if you're:
  • • Running 10K+ queries/day on a single, stable repo
  • • Need sub-100ms query latency
  • • Have ML/infra team to maintain embedding pipeline
  • • Already using vector DBs for other data
Use IDE Tools (Cursor/Copilot/Windsurf) if you're:
  • • A developer coding locally (not building a product)
  • • Need autocomplete + chat UI in your editor
  • • Only working with repos you have checked out
Use Sourcegraph if you're:
  • • Enterprise with 100+ developers needing code search UI
  • • Doing batch code migrations across repos
  • • Need compliance/audit trails for code access

Getting Started

We offer 100 free requests to get started. No credit card required. If you're building AI coding tools and want to try it:

Request API Access → View API Docs