DBMS > Faircom DB vs. Firebolt vs. JanusGraph vs. Sphinx vs. SQLite

System Properties Comparison Faircom DB vs. Firebolt vs. JanusGraph vs. Sphinx vs. SQLite

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Native high-speed multi-model DBMS for relational and key-value store data simultaneously accessible through SQL and NoSQL APIs.

Highly scalable cloud data warehouse and analytics product

Forked from Clickhouse

A Graph DBMS optimized for distributed clusters

It was forked from the latest code base of Titan in January 2017

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

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

Primary database model

Key-value store
Relational DBMS

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

Score	0.29
Rank	#304	Overall
	#43	Key-value stores
	#136	Relational DBMS

Score	1.73
Rank	#140	Overall
	#63	Relational DBMS

Score	2.02
Rank	#125	Overall
	#12	Graph DBMS

Score	5.95
Rank	#55	Overall
	#5	Search engines

Score	111.41
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Website

www.faircom.com/products/faircom-db

Technical documentation

docs.faircom.com/docs/en/UUID-7446ae34-a1a7-c843-c894-d5322e395184.html

docs.firebolt.io

docs.janusgraph.org

sphinxsearch.com/docs

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

Developer

FairCom Corporation

Firebolt Analytics Inc.

Linux Foundation; originally developed as Titan by Aurelius

Sphinx Technologies Inc.

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Initial release

1979

2020

2017

2001

2000

Current release

V12, November 2020

0.6.3, February 2023

3.5.1, February 2023

3.46.0 (23 May 2024), May 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Restricted, free version available

commercial

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

GPL version 2, commercial licence available

Open Source

Public Domain

Cloud-based only

Only available as a cloud service

yes

DBaaS offerings (sponsored links)

Database as a Service

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

Implementation language

ANSI C, C++

Java

C++

Server operating systems

AIX
FreeBSD
HP-UX
Linux
NetBSD
OS X
QNX
SCO
Solaris
VxWorks
Windows

easily portable to other OSs

hosted

Linux
OS X
Unix
Windows

FreeBSD
Linux
NetBSD
OS X
Solaris
Windows

server-less

Data scheme

schema free, schema optional, schema required, partial schema,

yes

dynamic column types

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes, ANSI SQL Types, JSON, typed binary structures

yes

not rigid because of 'dynamic typing' concept.

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

yes, ANSI SQL with proprietary extensions

yes

SQL-like query language (SphinxQL)

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

APIs and other access methods

ADO.NET
Direct SQL
JDBC
JPA
ODBC
RESTful HTTP/JSON API
RESTful MQTT/JSON API
RPC

.Net
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

Java API
TinkerPop Blueprints
TinkerPop Frames
TinkerPop Gremlin
TinkerPop Rexster

Proprietary protocol

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

Supported programming languages

.Net
C
C#
C++
Java
JavaScript (Node.js and browser)
PHP
Python
Visual Basic

Go
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

Clojure
Java
Python

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

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

.Net, JavaScript, C/C++

yes

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

File partitioning, horizontal partitioning, sharding

Customizable business rules for table partitioning

yes

depending on the used storage backend (e.g. Cassandra, HBase, BerkeleyDB)

Sharding

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

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes, configurable to be parallel or serial, synchronous or asynchronous, uni-directional or bi-directional, ACID-consistent or eventually consistent (with custom conflict resolution).

depending on storage layer

yes

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

via Faunus, a graph analytics engine

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency
Tunable consistency per server, database, table, and transaction

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Relationships in graphs

yes

Transaction concepts

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

tunable from ACID to Eventually Consistent

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

via file-system locks

Durability

Support for making data persistent

Yes, tunable from durable to delayed durability to in-memory

yes

Supports various storage backends: Cassandra, HBase, Berkeley DB, Akiban, Hazelcast

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

Fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard with additional protections for files

User authentification and security via Rexster Graph Server

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.