DBMS > BigObject vs. Drizzle vs. searchxml vs. Sphinx

System Properties Comparison BigObject vs. Drizzle vs. searchxml vs. Sphinx

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Drizzle has published its last release in September 2012. The open-source project is discontinued and Drizzle is excluded from the DB-Engines ranking.

Description

Analytic DBMS for real-time computations and queries

MySQL fork with a pluggable micro-kernel and with an emphasis of performance over compatibility.

DBMS for structured and unstructured content wrapped with an application server

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

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

a hierachical model (tree) can be imposed

Relational DBMS

Native XML DBMS
Search engine

Search engine

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

Score	0.19
Rank	#329	Overall
	#146	Relational DBMS

Score	0.03
Rank	#390	Overall
	#7	Native XML DBMS
	#24	Search engines

Score	5.95
Rank	#55	Overall
	#5	Search engines

Website

bigobject.io

www.searchxml.net/category/products

sphinxsearch.com

Technical documentation

docs.bigobject.io

www.searchxml.net/support/handouts

sphinxsearch.com/docs

Developer

BigObject, Inc.

Drizzle project, originally started by Brian Aker

informationpartners gmbh

Sphinx Technologies Inc.

Initial release

2015

2008

2015

2001

Current release

7.2.4, September 2012

1.0

3.5.1, February 2023

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free community edition available

Open Source

GNU GPL

commercial

Open Source

GPL version 2, commercial licence available

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

C++

Server operating systems

Linux

distributed as a docker-image
OS X

distributed as a docker-image (boot2docker)
Windows

distributed as a docker-image (boot2docker)

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X

Windows

FreeBSD
Linux
NetBSD
OS X
Solaris
Windows

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

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.

yes

Secondary indexes

yes

full-text index on all search fields

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like DML and DDL statements

yes

with proprietary extensions

SQL-like query language (SphinxQL)

APIs and other access methods

fluentd
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

JDBC

RESTful HTTP API
WebDAV
XQuery
XSLT

Proprietary protocol

Supported programming languages

C
C++
Java
PHP

C++

most other programming languages supported via APIs

C++

unofficial client library
Java
Perl

unofficial client library
PHP
Python
Ruby

unofficial client library

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Lua

yes

on the application server

Triggers

hooks for callbacks inside the server can be used.

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

none

Sharding

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

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

yes

sychronisation to multiple collections

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

none

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

automatically between fact table and dimension tables

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

multiple readers, single writer

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Read/write lock on objects (tables, trees)

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

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

In-memory capabilities

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

yes

User concepts

Access control

Pluggable authentication mechanisms

e.g. LDAP, HTTP

Domain, group and role-based access control at the document level and for application services

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.

Related products and services

We invite representatives of vendors of related products to contact us for presenting information about their offerings here.

More resources

DB-Engines blog posts

MySQL won the April ranking; did its forks follow?
1 April 2015, Paul Andlinger

Has MySQL finally lost its mojo?
1 July 2013, Matthias Gelbmann

show all

The DB-Engines ranking includes now search engines
4 February 2013, Paul Andlinger

show all

Recent citations in the news

Switching From Sphinx to MkDocs Documentation — What Did I Gain and Lose
2 February 2024, Towards Data Science

5 Powerful Alternatives to Elasticsearch
25 April 2024, Insider Monkey

Manticore is a Faster Alternative to Elasticsearch in C++
25 July 2022, hackernoon.com

Royal Mail stamp prices could rise, warns Czech Sphinx
3 June 2024, Proactive Investors UK

Perplexity AI: From Its Use To Operation, Everything You Need To Know About Google's Newest Challenger
11 January 2024, Free Press Journal

provided by Google News

Share this page