amu-pgvector

io.github.sangaraju1988由 GitHub 帳號 sangaraju1988 發布v0.1.3更新於 Oct 28, 2026

Lineage-gated agent memory tools on Postgres + pgvector, enforced by row-level security.

概覽

AI 產生的概覽

以 Postgres + pgvector 實作的譜系閘控代理記憶:儲存快取結果,只回傳給有權檢視其來源欄位的資料庫角色。

可以做什麼
  • 以語意搜尋已儲存的記憶單元,結果依請求角色的權限過濾
  • 記錄快取結果及產生它的 SQL,藉此擷取其資料譜系
  • 在重用或新增結果前檢查指標定義是否衝突
  • 所有讀寫都經過 Postgres 資料列層級安全性,原生 SQL、Python 用戶端、LangChain 與此伺服器共用同一道閘門
適用情境
適合多個代理或部門共用快取結果記憶,且需要避免某團隊的衍生數值外洩給無權檢視底層欄位的團隊時使用。也適合需要對指標定義做衝突偵測的情境。
執行需求
以 uvx 從 PyPI 套件(含 mcp 附加項)在使用者本機執行的程序。需要已安裝 pgvector 擴充並匯入專案 SQL 結構的 PostgreSQL 資料庫,以及透過 AMU_PGVECTOR_DSN 提供的 Postgres DSN,供伺服器所用角色連線;該角色須為 amu_writer 成員才能記錄或檢查衝突。使用內建備援嵌入器時,AMU_PGVECTOR_EMBEDDING_DIM 必須與結構中的向量維度一致。
安裝前請注意
DSN 是資料庫憑證,伺服器權限即該角色的權限,應使用專用的最小權限角色,而非擁有者或超級使用者帳號。記錄與衝突檢查會寫入資料庫。設計上信任寫入方提供的譜系資訊,因此謊報譜系的寫入方不在防護範圍內,超級使用者也會繞過資料列層級安全性。README 中的預設擁有者密碼僅供本機開發使用。

安裝

在 SourceWeft 中

  1. 開啟 儀表板中的 amu-pgvector,將其新增到工作區。
  2. 為需要使用其工具的對話啟用該服務。

Desktop only,透過 STDIO。 STDIO 服務會啟動本機處理程序,因此需要 SourceWeft 桌面主機。

其他 MCP 客戶端

參照 儲存庫 中的啟動說明。

README

amu-pgvector

[DOI]

Reference implementation of Lineage-Aware Memory Governance (Sangaraju & Vissa, IEEE Access, 10.1109/ACCESS.2026.3730363) on PostgreSQL + pgvector.

The problem

Say Finance computes avg(income) for a customer segment and caches the result so the next agent that asks the same question doesn't have to recompute it. Later, a Marketing agent asks a semantically similar question -- "what's the average customer income by segment?" -- and a naive shared memory, gated only on the metric's name or content tags, serves back Finance's cached result. Marketing was never permitted to see income. The result itself doesn't look like income -- it's a number -- but it was derived from a column Marketing isn't permitted to touch, and nothing about matching on metric name or content catches that. That's the leak this project closes: gating reuse on how a result was derived, not on what it looks like.

60-second quickstart

bash
git clone https://github.com/sangaraju1988/amu-pgvector.gitcd amu-pgvectordocker compose up -dpsql -h localhost -p 5433 -U amu_owner -d amu_dev -f sql/amu_pgvector.sql# password: amu_owner_password
bash
uv sync --all-packages --all-extras   # or: pip install amu-pgvector
python
from amu_pgvector import AMUStorefrom amu_pgvector.embeddings import fake_embedder
DSN = "postgresql://amu_owner:amu_owner_password@localhost:5433/amu_dev"embed = fake_embedder(dim=1536)  # swap for a real embedding model in production
admin = AMUStore(DSN)admin.register_sensitive_column("income")admin.grant_department_permission("Finance", "income")admin.create_agent_role("finance_agent", "Finance", "finance_pw")admin.create_agent_role("marketing_agent", "Marketing", "marketing_pw")
admin.record(    "SELECT avg(income) FROM customers",    {"avg": 82000},    metric_name="avg_income",    description="average customer income",    owner_department="Finance",    embed_fn=embed,)
finance_dsn = "postgresql://finance_agent:finance_pw@localhost:5433/amu_dev"marketing_dsn = "postgresql://marketing_agent:marketing_pw@localhost:5433/amu_dev"
AMUStore(finance_dsn).search("average customer income", k=5, embed_fn=embed)# -> [SearchResult(metric_name='avg_income', ...)]
AMUStore(marketing_dsn).search("average customer income", k=5, embed_fn=embed)# -> [] -- Marketing was never granted `income`, so Postgres itself#          never returns the row, regardless of how the query is asked.

Every line above was run against this exact repo before being written here (see docs/design.md for what a from-scratch install actually looks like). amu_owner/amu_owner_password is the docker-compose default -- change it for anything beyond local development.

How the gate works

amu.memory_units is a normal Postgres table with FORCE ROW LEVEL SECURITY enabled. Every write goes through a trigger that extracts the lineage of the SQL that actually produced the cached result (via amu-governance's sql_lineage module -- not self-reported by the agent), closes it over any registered materialized-view/derived-table edges, and computes S(a): the set of sensitive columns that lineage actually touches. A SELECT policy enforces S(a) ⊆ P(d) -- the row is visible only if every column in S(a) is in the requesting role's permitted set P(d) -- for every query against the table, from every client: raw SQL, amu.search(), the Python client, the LangChain integration, and the MCP server all go through the same policy, because it's the table's policy, not any one client's filter.

mermaid
sequenceDiagram    participant Writer as amu_writer role<br/>(trusted interception layer)    participant PG as Postgres: amu.memory_units<br/>(FORCE ROW LEVEL SECURITY)    participant Trigger as BEFORE INSERT trigger    participant Finance as finance_agent role    participant Marketing as marketing_agent role
    Writer->>PG: INSERT ... lineage = {"steps":[{"table":"customers","columns_used":["income"]}]}    PG->>Trigger: compute lineage_columns, S(a), lineage_status    Trigger-->>PG: sensitive_columns = {income}, resolved
    Finance->>PG: SELECT ... (session_user = finance_agent)    PG->>PG: S(a)={income} subset P(Finance)={income,...}? yes    PG-->>Finance: row returned
    Marketing->>PG: SELECT ... (session_user = marketing_agent)    PG->>PG: S(a)={income} subset P(Marketing)={...}? no    PG-->>Marketing: row not returned

See docs/design.md for how every paper concept maps to a specific SQL object, and docs/sql-reference.md for an exhaustive reference of every table, function, role and policy.

Security model and limits

Protected: cross-department leakage of a cached result's derivation columns (the core guarantee, enforced by RLS); silent metric-definition conflicts (amu.check_conflict()); a column reclassified as sensitive after AMUs already exist (a trigger recomputes affected rows, no rewrite needed); lineage closure that silently truncates a long or cyclic derivation chain (fails closed -- marks the AMU unresolved and invisible, rather than serving a partially-traced result).

Explicitly out of scope: a writer that lies about lineage (the SQL gate trusts amu_writer's input by design); inference by combining several individually-permitted AMUs; Postgres superusers, who always bypass RLS; timing side channels; a "convenience mode" identity option (off by default) that's only as safe as the boundary between trusted application code and agent-influenced code on a pooled connection.

Full writeup: docs/threat-model.md.

Benchmarks

Every number below is quoted directly from results/SUMMARY.md, generated by benchmarks/generate_summary.py from committed results/<name>/<timestamp>/ runs (git SHA, Postgres/pgvector versions, hardware, seed and parameters in each run's manifest.json). Re-run the benchmark scripts yourself to reproduce or challenge these; nothing here is estimated.

Leak rate (2000 requests over 600 synthetic AMUs, Finance/Marketing/Support):

ConditionServedCross-department leaksLeak rate
Naive (content-gated, no lineage check)2000101050.5%
amu-pgvector (RLS-gated)99000.0%

Latency (p50/p95 at k=10; RLS and hnsw.iterative_scan each on/off, same role/queries/data per row):

nRLSiterative_scanp50 (ms)p95 (ms)
10,000onon (amu.search() default)66.870.2
10,000onoff81.988.2
10,000offon19.521.8
10,000offoff49.252.3
100,000onon (amu.search() default)712.9851.2
100,000onoff43.465.7
100,000offon376.8418.5
100,000offoff46.670.9

Read honestly: hnsw.iterative_scan=relaxed_order (what amu.search() uses by default, so that filtered results still hit k even when most rows are hidden) costs real latency at scale -- roughly 16x slower than iterative-off at 100k rows in this run. That's the price of the recall guarantee below; if your visible fraction is consistently high, you may prefer to query without it. 1M-row scale was not attempted: the 100k HNSW index build alone took about 7 minutes on the machine this was run on (Docker Desktop on macOS, sharing the host with unrelated workloads) -- recorded honestly rather than extrapolated.

Filtered recall (recall@10 of gated HNSW search vs. exact brute-force over the same role's actually-visible rows, n=20,000):

Visible fractionrecall@10 (mean)recall@10 (min)
50%100.0%100.0%
10%100.0%100.0%
1%100.0%100.0%

Integrations

  • Plain SQL -- sql/amu_pgvector.sql is the artifact that matters most: idempotent, installs on a managed Postgres as a normal database owner (no superuser), no C extensions beyond vector. Works identically on Supabase and Neon (see submissions/supabase-neon-guide.md for a from-scratch tutorial covering both).
  • LangChain -- langchain-amu provides AMUVectorStore and AMURetriever. Every read runs under the store's own Postgres role, so RLS gates LangChain the same way it gates raw SQL. See packages/langchain-amu/.
  • MCP -- pip install amu-pgvector[mcp] adds an amu-pgvector-mcp console script exposing amu_search, amu_record and amu_check_conflict as tools, gated the same way. See packages/amu-pgvector/src/amu_pgvector/mcp_server.py.

Citation

bibtex
@article{sangaraju2026lineage,  title   = {Lineage-Aware Memory Governance: A Derivation-Gated Framework             for Privacy-Preserving Column-Level Access Control in             Enterprise AI Agents},  author  = {Sangaraju, Venkata and Vissa, Sudhir},  journal = {IEEE Access},  year    = {2026},  doi     = {10.1109/ACCESS.2026.3730363}}

See CITATION.cff to also cite this software directly.

License

MIT. See LICENSE.

Related

來源:README.md,提交 ad181f7

工具

0
SourceWeft 尚未在沙箱中啟動過該軟體包,因此其工具未知。

版本歷史

2
  1. v0.1.3最新Oct 1, 2026
  2. v0.1.2Sep 29, 2026

評分

已滿足適用檢查項的 50%

該評分衡量此收錄條目的完整程度,依據註冊中心條目、端點與公開來源計算得出。它不是對伺服器本身的評價,也不表示伺服器安全或目前可用:可連通性是帶日期的檢查結果,評分也不包含安裝量或使用者評價。

  • 近 30 天內可連通25 分

    請保持端點能夠回應 MCP 握手;SourceWeft 每 30 天探測一次。

  • 已宣告認證方式10 分

    請在註冊中心條目中宣告憑證請求標頭,或保持端點能夠回應探測,以便判定其認證方式。

  • 已列出工具15 分

    請讓伺服器在無憑證時回應 tools/list,或發布可在沙箱中無憑證啟動的軟體包。

  • 描述必需15 分
  • 圖示10 分
  • 文件15 分
  • 授權條款10 分