CodeLamda Technologies
HomeServicesWorkAboutCareerContact
Book a call
CodeLamda Technologies

Transforming ideas into scalable digital products. We help startups and businesses build MVPs, AI solutions, and modern applications with speed, quality, and innovation.

Quick Links

  • Home
  • Services
  • Portfolio
  • Blog
  • About
  • Contact

Our Services

  • MVP Development
  • AI Development
  • Web Development
  • Vibe Code Audit
  • CleverTap Integration

Locations

  • USA Software Development
  • UK Software Development
  • UAE / Dubai Software Development
  • Australia Software Development
  • All locations

Contact Us

7th Floor, APMC, Krushi Bazaar,
704 Sahara Darwaja, Begampura,
Surat, Gujarat 395003

contact@codelamda.com
+91 99099 80048

© 2026 Codelamda Technologies Pvt. Ltd. All rights reserved.

Privacy Policy•Terms of Service
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Services
  4. /
  5. RAG Development
Service / RAG Development

Retrieval-augmented generation that answers from your data, not the internet.

We build production RAG systems that give your LLM access to your private docs, knowledge base, or product catalogue — with citations, access control, and accuracy you can measure. Not a weekend vector-DB demo — a pipeline your customers actually trust.

Book a discovery call See the work
What we build

A production RAG pipeline, not a prototype.

Every component — from chunking to citation UI — built, measured, and deployed as a system.

Chunking and embedding pipeline

Recursive chunking with overlap, OpenAI or Cohere embedders, metadata extraction — tuned per corpus, not left on defaults.

Vector store selection and setup

pgvector if you already run Postgres, Pinecone or Qdrant for scale. Schema design, indexing strategy, and hybrid (BM25 + dense) retrieval.

Reranking for accuracy

Cohere Rerank or cross-encoder models that lift retrieval accuracy 10–20 points over cosine-only search. The step most teams skip.

Citations and source attribution

Every answer links back to the source chunk with page/section references. Your users — and your compliance team — see where facts come from.

Access control and multi-tenancy

Org-level and user-level ACLs on the retrieval layer so each customer sees only their data. Critical for B2B SaaS RAG.

Eval harness from day one

100-query scored eval set built in week one. Every chunking, embedding, or prompt change is measured against it before merge.

How we build it

Corpus to production in 4–8 weeks.

No discovery phase that never ends. Each step has a deliverable, a date, and a demo.

01

Corpus audit

We profile your documents — format, length distribution, structure, metadata density — and pick the chunking + embedding strategy that fits.

02

Pipeline build

Ingest → chunk → embed → store → retrieve → rerank → prompt → generate. Each hop instrumented, each step configurable.

03

Eval and tune

Run the 100-query eval set. Iterate chunking, prompt, and reranker until accuracy clears the bar your team sets.

04

Ship with guardrails

Production deploy with citation UI, hallucination detection, fallback paths, and observability (LangSmith or Langfuse).

Pipeline metrics

Numbers from real client deployments.

30+
RAG systems shipped
92%
Avg. retrieval accuracy
2 wk
To first working pipeline
<$0.02
Per query at 10k/mo
RAG stack

The retrieval infrastructure we deploy.

Opinionated defaults — we swap components when your corpus or scale calls for it.

OpenAICoherepgvectorPineconeQdrantLangChainLlamaIndexLangSmithLangfusePythonTypeScriptNext.js
Keep reading

Related work and reading.

RAG vs fine-tuning

The decision matrix we apply per feature, with the four-question test.

LLM integration

Wiring models into production with routing, guardrails and cost control.

Agentic AI development

When retrieval alone is not enough and the system needs to act.

What separates a RAG demo from a production RAG system?

A demo retrieves the top few chunks by cosine similarity and pastes them into a prompt. A production system adds a reranker, hybrid retrieval combining dense and sparse search, chunking tuned to your document structure rather than a fixed token count, metadata filters so a user only ever retrieves what they are permitted to see, and citations that point at a specific passage rather than a whole document.

The reranker is the single highest-leverage component and the one most often skipped. Retrieving twenty candidates and reranking to five typically moves answer accuracy ten to twenty points versus taking the top five directly — because embedding similarity is a decent first filter and a poor final judge.

RAG vs fine-tuning: which fits your product →

Why do RAG systems give wrong answers, and how do you fix it?

Almost always retrieval, not generation. If the right passage never reaches the prompt, no model can answer correctly. Diagnose by measuring retrieval recall separately from answer quality: take fifty real questions, check whether the correct source document appears in the retrieved set at all, and fix that number first. Teams that jump straight to prompt engineering are tuning the wrong stage.

The second cause is chunking that splits meaning. A table cut in half, a clause separated from its heading, or a procedure split mid-step retrieves as noise. Chunk along the document's own structure, keep an overlap, and carry the section heading into each chunk as context.

Which vector database should you use?

If you already run Postgres, use pgvector. One database to operate, transactional consistency between your documents and their embeddings, and it comfortably handles millions of vectors — which is more than most products ever reach. Reach for Pinecone or Qdrant when you genuinely need scale beyond that, or when you want managed operations more than you want one fewer system.

The database is rarely the thing that determines whether your RAG system works. Chunking strategy, retrieval quality and reranking decide that, and they are portable across every store.

How do you handle permissions and private data in RAG?

Filter at retrieval time using metadata on each chunk, never by asking the model to withhold information it has already been shown. A model instructed to ignore context it can see is one prompt injection away from repeating it. Every chunk carries its access scope, and the retriever applies the user's permissions before anything reaches the prompt.

For regulated data, add a zero-retention agreement with your model provider, keep embeddings in-region, and log which chunks were retrieved for each answer so an auditor can reconstruct what the system saw.

FAQ

RAG: accuracy, cost, and production readiness

Next step

Let's scope your RAG development build.

A 30-minute call. We'll talk scope, timelines, and what a realistic first release looks like. NDA signed before we start.

50+
MVPs shipped
8 wks
Avg. delivery
$20M+
Raised by clients
30 days
Post-launch support
30-minute callBook a discovery callPrefer emailSend us a briefExplore all services