DBMS > BaseX vs. Sphinx vs. SQLite vs. Ultipa vs. VelocityDB

System Properties Comparison BaseX vs. Sphinx vs. SQLite vs. Ultipa vs. VelocityDB

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Light-weight Native XML DBMS with support for XQuery 3.0 and interactive GUI.

Open source search engine for searching in data from different sources, e.g. relational databases

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

High performance Graph DBMS supporting HTAP high availability cluster deployment

A .NET Object Database that can be embedded/distributed and extended to a graph data model (VelocityGraph)

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
Object oriented DBMS

DB-Engines Ranking measures the popularity of database management systems
Trend Chart

Score	1.84
Rank	#135	Overall
	#4	Native XML DBMS

Score	5.95
Rank	#55	Overall
	#5	Search engines

Score	111.41
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Score	0.19
Rank	#330	Overall
	#30	Graph DBMS

Score	0.11
Rank	#354	Overall
	#37	Graph DBMS
	#15	Object oriented DBMS

Website

Technical documentation

docs.basex.org

sphinxsearch.com/docs

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

www.ultipa.com/document

velocitydb.com/UserGuide

Developer

BaseX GmbH

Sphinx Technologies Inc.

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Ultipa

VelocityDB Inc

Initial release

2007

2001

2000

2019

2011

Current release

11.0, June 2024

3.5.1, February 2023

3.46.0 (23 May 2024), May 2024

7.x

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

BSD license

Open Source

GPL version 2, commercial licence available

Open Source

Public Domain

commercial

Cloud-based only

Only available as a cloud service

DBaaS offerings (sponsored links)

Database as a Service

Providers of DBaaS offerings, please contact us to be listed.

Implementation language

Java

C++

Server operating systems

Linux
OS X
Windows

FreeBSD
Linux
NetBSD
OS X
Solaris
Windows

server-less

Any that supports .NET

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

dynamic column types

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

XQuery supports types

yes

not rigid because of 'dynamic typing' concept.

yes

XML support

Some form of processing data in XML format, e.g. support for XML data structures, and/or support for XPath, XQuery or XSLT.

Secondary indexes

yes

full-text index on all search fields

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language (SphinxQL)

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

APIs and other access methods

Java API
RESTful HTTP API
RESTXQ
WebDAV
XML:DB
XQJ

Proprietary protocol

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

RESTful HTTP API

.Net

Supported programming languages

Actionscript
C
C#
Haskell
Java
JavaScript

Node.js
Lisp
Perl
PHP
Python
Qt
Rebol
Ruby
Scala
Visual Basic

C++

unofficial client library
Java
Perl

unofficial client library
PHP
Python
Ruby

unofficial client library

Actionscript
Ada
Basic
C
C#
C++
D
Delphi
Forth
Fortran
Haskell
Java
JavaScript
Lisp
Lua
MatLab
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
PL/SQL
Python
R
Ruby
Scala
Scheme
Smalltalk
Tcl

C++
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

.Net

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Triggers

yes

via events

yes

Callbacks are triggered when data changes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

Partitioning is done manually, search queries against distributed index is supported

none

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

Support to ensure data integrity after non-atomic manipulations of data

multiple readers, single writer

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

via file-system locks

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

The original contents of fields are not stored in the Sphinx index.

yes

In-memory capabilities

Is there an option to define some or all structures to be held in-memory only.

yes

User concepts

Access control

Users with fine-grained authorization concept on 4 levels

Based on Windows Authentication

More information provided by the system vendor

We invite representatives of system vendors to contact us for updating and extending the system information,
and for displaying vendor-provided information such as key customers, competitive advantages and market metrics.