DBMS > Microsoft SQL Server vs. Sphinx vs. TigerGraph vs. TinkerGraph vs. Valentina Server

System Properties Comparison Microsoft SQL Server vs. Sphinx vs. TigerGraph vs. TinkerGraph vs. Valentina Server

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Microsofts flagship relational DBMS

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

A complete, distributed, parallel graph computing platform supporting web-scale data analytics in real-time

A lightweight, in-memory graph engine that serves as a reference implementation of the TinkerPop3 API

Object-relational database and reports server

Primary database model

Secondary database models

Document store
Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	829.80
Rank	#3	Overall
	#3	Relational DBMS

Score	6.03
Rank	#60	Overall
	#6	Search engines

Score	1.83
Rank	#141	Overall
	#13	Graph DBMS

Score	0.12
Rank	#344	Overall
	#34	Graph DBMS

Score	0.18
Rank	#329	Overall
	#144	Relational DBMS

Website

www.microsoft.com/en-us/sql-server

sphinxsearch.com

www.tigergraph.com

tinkerpop.apache.org/docs/current/reference/#tinkergraph-gremlin

www.valentina-db.net

Technical documentation

learn.microsoft.com/en-US/sql/sql-server

sphinxsearch.com/docs

docs.tigergraph.com

valentina-db.com/docs/dokuwiki/v5/doku.php

Developer

Microsoft

Sphinx Technologies Inc.

Paradigma Software

Initial release

1989

2001

2017

2009

1999

Current release

SQL Server 2022, November 2022

3.5.1, February 2023

5.7.5

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

restricted free version is available

Open Source

GPL version 2, commercial licence available

commercial

Open Source

Apache 2.0

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++

Java

Server operating systems

Linux
Windows

FreeBSD
Linux
NetBSD
OS X
Solaris
Windows

Linux

Linux
OS X
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

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

SQL-like query language (SphinxQL)

SQL-like query language (GSQL)

yes

APIs and other access methods

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
OLE DB
Tabular Data Stream (TDS)

Proprietary protocol

GSQL (TigerGraph Query Language)
Kafka
RESTful HTTP/JSON API

TinkerPop 3

ODBC

Supported programming languages

C#
C++
Delphi
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Visual Basic

C++

unofficial client library
Java
Perl

unofficial client library
PHP
Python
Ruby

unofficial client library

C++
Java

Groovy
Java

.Net
C
C#
C++
Objective-C
PHP
Ruby
Visual Basic
Visual Basic.NET

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Transact SQL, .NET languages, R, Python and (with SQL Server 2019) Java

yes

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

tables can be distributed across several files (horizontal partitioning); sharding through federation

Sharding

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

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes, but depending on the SQL-Server Edition

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

none

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Relationships in graphs

yes

Relationships in graphs

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

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

yes

optional

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

Role-based access control

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

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.