EdgeQuake vs Microsoft GraphRAG

Product: v0.19.0

Two Approaches to Graph-Enhanced RAG

Both EdgeQuake and Microsoft GraphRAG use knowledge graphs to enhance retrieval quality. They share similar goals but differ significantly in implementation, architecture, and operational characteristics.

Quick Comparison

Aspect	Microsoft GraphRAG	EdgeQuake
Language	Python	Rust
GitHub Stars	30.6k+	~1k
License	MIT	Apache-2.0
Algorithm Origin	Original research (arxiv:2404.16130)	LightRAG paper (arxiv:2410.05779)
Community Detection	Leiden (hierarchical)	Louvain (flat)
Query Modes	4 (Global, Local, DRIFT, Basic)	6 (naive, local, global, hybrid, mix, bypass)
Multi-tenant	❌	✅ Built-in + PG RLS
PDF vision	❌	✅ Vision LLM pipeline
Ingestion cancel	N/A	✅ SPEC-057 cooperative cancel
Multi-replica	N/A	✅ `EDGEQUAKE_REPLICAS` + claim/lease
Async Runtime	asyncio	Tokio
Indexing Cost	Very high ($$$)	Moderate ($$)

Architectural Philosophy

┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│                   GRAPHRAG ARCHITECTURE                         │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│                                                                 │
│  ┌─────────────┐                                                │
│  │   Python    │  Pandas DataFrames, asyncio                    │
│  │ Data Pipes  │  Pipeline-based data transformation            │
│  └──────┬──────┘                                                │
│         │                                                       │
│         ▼                                                       │
│  ┌─────────────┐    ┌─────────────┐    ┌─────────────┐          │
│  │   Parquet   │    │  LanceDB    │    │   CosmosDB  │          │
│  │   Files     │    │  (Vector)   │    │  (Optional) │          │
│  └─────────────┘    └─────────────┘    └─────────────┘          │
│                                                                 │
│  Focus: Research, Analysis, Batch Processing                    │
│                                                                 │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│                   EDGEQUAKE ARCHITECTURE                        │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│                                                                 │
│  ┌─────────────┐                                                │
│  │    Rust     │  Tokio async, zero-copy, 11 crates             │
│  │   Engine    │  Multi-tenant, streaming-first                 │
│  └──────┬──────┘                                                │
│         │                                                       │
│         ▼                                                       │
│  ┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │
│  │              PostgreSQL (Unified Backend)                  │ │
│  │  ┌─────────┐  ┌─────────┐  ┌─────────────────────────────┐ │ │
│  │  │pgvector │  │ Apache  │  │   Standard Tables           │ │ │
│  │  │(vectors)│  │  AGE    │  │   (docs, workspaces)        │ │ │
│  │  │         │  │ (graph) │  │                             │ │ │
│  │  └─────────┘  └─────────┘  └─────────────────────────────┘ │ │
│  └────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ │
│                                                                 │
│  Focus: Production Services, Multi-tenant SaaS                  │
│                                                                 │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

Algorithm Comparison

Community Detection

Aspect	GraphRAG	EdgeQuake
Algorithm	Leiden	Louvain
Hierarchy	✅ Multi-level	⚠️ Flat (single level)
Summaries	Per-level reports	Community summaries
Use at Query	Level-based selection	All communities

GraphRAG’s Hierarchical Approach:

                    Level 0
                 ┌────────────┐
                 │ High-level │
                 │  Summary   │
                 └─────┬──────┘
                       │
          ┌────────────┼────────────┐
          ▼            ▼            ▼
    ┌──────────┐ ┌──────────┐ ┌──────────┐   Level 1
    │ Cluster  │ │ Cluster  │ │ Cluster  │
    │ Summary  │ │ Summary  │ │ Summary  │
    └────┬─────┘ └────┬─────┘ └────┬─────┘
         │            │            │
    ┌────┴────┐  ┌────┴────┐  ┌────┴────┐   Level 2
    │ Nodes   │  │ Nodes   │  │ Nodes   │
    └─────────┘  └─────────┘  └─────────┘

GraphRAG generates summaries at each hierarchical level, allowing queries to target the appropriate level of detail.

EdgeQuake’s Flat Approach:

    ┌──────────┐ ┌──────────┐ ┌──────────┐
    │ Community│ │ Community│ │ Community│
    │    1     │ │    2     │ │    3     │
    │ Summary  │ │ Summary  │ │ Summary  │
    └────┬─────┘ └────┬─────┘ └────┬─────┘
         │            │            │
    ┌────┴────┐  ┌────┴────┐  ┌────┴────┐
    │ Entities│  │ Entities│  │ Entities│
    └─────────┘  └─────────┘  └─────────┘

EdgeQuake uses flat communities, trading hierarchical flexibility for simpler implementation and faster indexing.

Query Modes Mapping

GraphRAG Mode	EdgeQuake Equivalent	Description
Global Search	`global`	Community summaries for holistic questions
Local Search	`local`	Entity-centered graph traversal
DRIFT Search	N/A	Local + community context
Basic Search	`naive`	Standard vector similarity
N/A	`hybrid`	Combined local + global (default)
N/A	`mix`	Weighted combination with scores
N/A	`bypass`	Direct LLM, no retrieval

Key Difference: GraphRAG’s DRIFT (Dynamic Reasoning Including Facts and Themes) mode combines local entity search with community context. EdgeQuake’s hybrid mode combines local and global but without the adaptive weighting.

Indexing Pipeline

GraphRAG Pipeline

┌────────────┐    ┌────────────┐    ┌────────────┐
│   Load     │ ─▶ │   Chunk    │ ─▶ │  Extract   │
│ Documents  │    │ Documents  │    │   Graph    │
└────────────┘    └────────────┘    └─────┬──────┘
                                          │
                                          ▼
┌────────────┐    ┌────────────┐    ┌────────────┐
│   Embed    │ ◀─ │  Generate  │ ◀─ │  Detect    │
│  Reports   │    │  Reports   │    │Communities │
└─────┬──────┘    └────────────┘    └────────────┘
      │
      ▼
┌────────────┐    ┌────────────┐    ┌────────────┐
│   Embed    │ ─▶ │   Embed    │ ─▶ │  Extract   │
│  Chunks    │    │  Entities  │    │   Claims   │
└────────────┘    └────────────┘    └────────────┘

GraphRAG extras:

Claims extraction (fact-like statements)
Multi-level community reports
Entity covariates (additional attributes)

EdgeQuake Pipeline

┌────────────┐    ┌────────────┐    ┌────────────┐
│   Load     │ ─▶ │   Chunk    │ ─▶ │  Extract   │
│ Documents  │    │ Documents  │    │ Entities + │
└────────────┘    └────────────┘    │ Relations  │
                                    └─────┬──────┘
                                          │
                                          ▼
┌────────────┐    ┌────────────┐    ┌────────────┐
│   Store    │ ◀─ │  Community │ ◀─ │  Normalize │
│   Graph    │    │ Detection  │    │  & Merge   │
└────────────┘    └────────────┘    └────────────┘

EdgeQuake optimizations:

Entity normalization (deduplication)
Gleaning (multi-pass extraction)
Source lineage tracking
Concurrent chunk processing

Performance Characteristics

Indexing Cost

Document Type	GraphRAG	EdgeQuake	Notes
10-page report	~$5-15	~$0.50-2.00	Per document
100-page book	~$50-150	~$5-20	Highly variable
1000 documents	~$500-5000	~$50-500	Batch processing

Why GraphRAG costs more:

Hierarchical community summaries at multiple levels
Claims extraction (additional LLM calls)
Entity covariates extraction
Coarser chunking requiring more context

Why EdgeQuake costs less:

Flat community structure
Optimized prompts from LightRAG research
Entity deduplication reduces redundancy
Smaller default chunk sizes

Query Latency

Query Type	GraphRAG	EdgeQuake
Simple lookup	~300-800ms	~200-500ms
Global (themes)	~2-5s (map-reduce)	~500ms-2s
Complex reasoning	~1-3s	~500ms-1.5s

GraphRAG’s map-reduce: Global search uses map-reduce over community reports, which is thorough but slow. Each “map” step generates intermediate responses, then “reduce” aggregates them.

EdgeQuake’s parallel approach: Uses Tokio’s concurrent task execution for parallel context retrieval, generally faster for production workloads.

Feature Matrix

Feature	GraphRAG	EdgeQuake
Entity extraction	✅	✅
Relationship extraction	✅	✅
Community detection	✅ Multi-level	✅ Flat
Community summaries	✅	✅
Claims extraction	✅	❌
Entity covariates	✅	❌
Gleaning (multi-pass)	❌	✅
Entity normalization	⚠️ Basic	✅ Advanced
Source lineage	⚠️ Basic	✅ Full
PDF vision ingestion	❌	✅
Ingestion cancel	❌	✅
Multi-replica workers	❌	✅
Multi-tenant	❌	✅
REST API	❌	✅
Streaming responses	⚠️	✅ SSE
OpenAI-compatible API	❌	✅
Prompt tuning CLI	✅	❌
DRIFT search	✅	❌
LLM caching	✅	⚠️ Basic

Storage Backends

GraphRAG Options

Backend	Vector	Graph	Status
Parquet/Files	❌	✅	Default
LanceDB	✅	❌	Default
Azure AI Search	✅	❌	Supported
CosmosDB	✅	✅	Supported
Neo4j	❌	✅	Community

EdgeQuake Options

Backend	Vector	Graph	Status
PostgreSQL 16–18 + pgvector + AGE	✅	✅	Required
In-memory	—	—	Removed (tests use mocks)

EdgeQuake’s unified PostgreSQL:

DATABASE_URL required — no production in-memory fallback
Official images: ghcr.io/raphaelmansuy/edgequake-postgres:0.19.0-pg16|pg17|pg18
Transactional consistency + RLS tenant isolation
Simpler deployment than split Parquet + LanceDB stacks

Deployment Complexity

GraphRAG

# Typical GraphRAG deployment needs:
dependencies:
  - Python 3.10+
  - LLM API (OpenAI/Azure)
  - File storage (Parquet)
  - Vector store (LanceDB/Azure AI Search)
  - Optional: CosmosDB, Neo4j

deployment_model: CLI/Notebook-driven
production_ready: Limited (research focus)
multi_tenant: Manual implementation required

EdgeQuake

# EdgeQuake deployment needs:
dependencies:
  - Rust runtime (compiled binary or GHCR image)
  - PostgreSQL 16–18 with pgvector + AGE (required)
  - LLM API (OpenAI/Ollama/Vertex OAuth2)

deployment_model: Docker/Container (ghcr.io/raphaelmansuy/edgequake)
production_ready: Yes
multi_tenant: Built-in via workspaces + RLS
multi_replica: EDGEQUAKE_REPLICAS>1 requires bridged/notify_only delivery

Use Case Recommendations

Choose GraphRAG When:

✅ Deep research and analysis is the goal
✅ Hierarchical document understanding is critical
✅ You need claims/facts extraction
✅ You’re working in a Python-centric environment
✅ Indexing cost is not a concern
✅ Batch processing is acceptable

Choose EdgeQuake When:

✅ Building a production service
✅ Multi-tenant SaaS is required
✅ Real-time query latency matters
✅ Indexing cost optimization is important
✅ PostgreSQL is your preferred database
✅ REST API is needed
✅ Streaming responses are required

Migration Considerations

GraphRAG → EdgeQuake

Data Export: Export entities and relationships from GraphRAG’s Parquet files
Schema Mapping: Map to EdgeQuake’s PostgreSQL schema
Community Re-detection: EdgeQuake uses flat communities, re-run detection
Query Mode Adjustment: Map GraphRAG modes to EdgeQuake equivalents

EdgeQuake → GraphRAG

Data Export: Query PostgreSQL for entities/relationships
Format Conversion: Convert to GraphRAG’s expected input format
Re-indexing: Full re-index required for hierarchical communities
API Replacement: Replace REST API calls with GraphRAG library calls

Summary

┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│                    DECISION MATRIX
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│                                                                 │
│  Requirement                 │ GraphRAG  │ EdgeQuake            │
│  ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────  │
│  Research/Analysis           │    ⭐⭐⭐⭐       ⭐⭐⭐
│  Production Service          │    ⭐⭐         ⭐⭐⭐⭐
│  Multi-tenant SaaS           │    ⭐          ⭐⭐⭐⭐
│  Indexing Cost Efficiency    │    ⭐⭐         ⭐⭐⭐⭐
│  Query Latency               │    ⭐⭐         ⭐⭐⭐⭐
│  Hierarchical Understanding  │    ⭐⭐⭐⭐       ⭐⭐⭐
│  Python Ecosystem            │    ⭐⭐⭐⭐       ⭐⭐
│  Claims Extraction           │    ⭐⭐⭐⭐       ❌
│  REST API                    │    ⭐          ⭐⭐⭐⭐
│
│  GraphRAG: Best for research, analysis, deep document study     │
│  EdgeQuake: Best for production services, SaaS, real-time apps  │
│                                                                 │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

References

Microsoft GraphRAG Paper (arxiv:2404.16130)
LightRAG Paper (arxiv:2410.05779)
GraphRAG Documentation
EdgeQuake Quick Start

EdgeQuake vs Microsoft GraphRAG

EdgeQuake vs Microsoft GraphRAG

Quick Comparison

Architectural Philosophy

Algorithm Comparison

Community Detection

Query Modes Mapping

Indexing Pipeline

GraphRAG Pipeline

EdgeQuake Pipeline

Performance Characteristics

Indexing Cost

Query Latency

Feature Matrix

Storage Backends

GraphRAG Options

EdgeQuake Options

Deployment Complexity

GraphRAG

EdgeQuake

Use Case Recommendations

Choose GraphRAG When:

Choose EdgeQuake When:

Migration Considerations

GraphRAG → EdgeQuake

EdgeQuake → GraphRAG

Summary

References

See Also