DBMS > LevelDB vs. RocksDB vs. Sphinx vs. Ultipa

System Properties Comparison LevelDB vs. RocksDB vs. Sphinx vs. Ultipa

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Embeddable fast key-value storage library that provides an ordered mapping from string keys to string values

Embeddable persistent key-value store optimized for fast storage (flash and RAM)

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

High performance Graph DBMS supporting HTAP high availability cluster deployment

Primary database model

Key-value store

Search engine

Graph DBMS

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

Score	2.25
Rank	#115	Overall
	#19	Key-value stores

Score	3.41
Rank	#86	Overall
	#11	Key-value stores

Score	5.95
Rank	#55	Overall
	#5	Search engines

Score	0.19
Rank	#330	Overall
	#30	Graph DBMS

Website

github.com/google/leveldb

rocksdb.org

sphinxsearch.com

www.ultipa.com

Technical documentation

github.com/google/leveldb/blob/main/doc/index.md

github.com/facebook/rocksdb/wiki

sphinxsearch.com/docs

www.ultipa.com/document

Developer

Google

Facebook, Inc.

Sphinx Technologies Inc.

Ultipa

Initial release

2011

2013

2001

2019

Current release

1.23, February 2021

9.2.1, May 2024

3.5.1, February 2023

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

BSD

Open Source

BSD

Open Source

GPL version 2, commercial licence available

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

C++

Server operating systems

Illumos
Linux
OS X
Windows

Linux

FreeBSD
Linux
NetBSD
OS X
Solaris
Windows

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

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

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language (SphinxQL)

APIs and other access methods

C++ API
Java API

Proprietary protocol

RESTful HTTP API

Supported programming languages

C++
Go
Java

3rd party binding
JavaScript (Node.js)

3rd party binding
Python

3rd party binding

C
C++
Go
Java
Perl
Python
Ruby

C++

unofficial client library
Java
Perl

unofficial client library
PHP
Python
Ruby

unofficial client library

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

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Triggers

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

horizontal partitioning

Sharding

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

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

yes

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

Transaction concepts

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

yes

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

with automatic compression on writes

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

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.