DBMS > LevelDB vs. Sphinx vs. SQLite vs. Tigris

System Properties Comparison LevelDB vs. Sphinx vs. SQLite vs. Tigris

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

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

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

A horizontally scalable, ACID transactional, document database available both as a fully managed cloud service and for deployment on self-managed infrastructure

Primary database model

Key-value store

Search engine

Relational DBMS

Document store
Key-value store
Search engine
Time Series DBMS

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

Score	2.35
Rank	#111	Overall
	#19	Key-value stores

Score	5.98
Rank	#56	Overall
	#5	Search engines

Score	114.32
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Score	0.02
Rank	#369	Overall
	#51	Document stores
	#55	Key-value stores
	#24	Search engines
	#38	Time Series DBMS

Website

github.com/google/leveldb

sphinxsearch.com

www.sqlite.org

www.tigrisdata.com

Technical documentation

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

sphinxsearch.com/docs

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

www.tigrisdata.com/docs

Developer

Google

Sphinx Technologies Inc.

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Tigris Data, Inc.

Initial release

2011

2001

2000

2022

Current release

1.23, February 2021

3.5.1, February 2023

3.45.3 (15 April 2024), April 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

BSD

Open Source

GPL version 2, commercial licence available

Open Source

Public Domain

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

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

FreeBSD
Linux
NetBSD
OS X
Solaris
Windows

server-less

Linux
macOS
Windows

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

dynamic column types

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

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

Proprietary protocol

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

CLI Client
gRPC
RESTful HTTP API

Supported programming languages

C++
Go
Java

3rd party binding
JavaScript (Node.js)

3rd party binding
Python

3rd party binding

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

Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Triggers

yes

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

yes

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

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

via file-system locks

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.

yes

yes, using FoundationDB

In-memory capabilities

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

yes

User concepts

Access control

Access rights for users and roles

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.