Qdrant vs Summa
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted search engines options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
Qdrant
High-performance open-source vector search engine
VS
Summa
Full-text search server able to run in the browser via WASM
| Feature | Qdrant | Summa |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Search Engines | Search Engines |
| License | Apache-2.0 | MIT |
| Language | Rust | Rust |
| Setup difficulty | Medium | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 512 MB | 256 MB |
| Deployment | docker, kubernetes, helm | docker, binary |
| GitHub stars | ★ 33,837 | ★ 291 |
| First released | 2021 | 2021 |
| Replaces | Pinecone, Algolia | Elasticsearch |
Why pick each one
Choose Summa if…
- Released under the MIT license
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Written in Rust
- Tiny footprint — runs in 256 MB RAM
Frequently asked questions
Is Qdrant or Summa better?
Neither is universally better. Qdrant has the larger community; both share a medium setup difficulty, so the decision comes down to features and licensing.
Are Qdrant and Summa free and open-source?
Yes. Qdrant is licensed under Apache-2.0 and Summa under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Qdrant and Summa with Docker?
Qdrant: yes. Summa: yes.