DBMS > NSDb vs. OrigoDB vs. RavenDB vs. Sphinx

System Properties Comparison NSDb vs. OrigoDB vs. RavenDB vs. Sphinx

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Scalable, High-performance Time Series DBMS designed for Real-time Analytics on top of Kubernetes

A fully ACID in-memory object graph database

Open Source Operational and Transactional Enterprise NoSQL Document Database

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

Primary database model

Time Series DBMS

Document store
Object oriented DBMS

Document store

Search engine

Secondary database models

Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS
Time Series DBMS

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

Score	0.00
Rank	#385	Overall
	#40	Time Series DBMS

Score	0.00
Rank	#385	Overall
	#54	Document stores
	#21	Object oriented DBMS

Score	2.68
Rank	#102	Overall
	#19	Document stores

Score	5.97
Rank	#56	Overall
	#5	Search engines

Website

Technical documentation

nsdb.io/Architecture

origodb.com/docs

ravendb.net/docs

sphinxsearch.com/docs

Developer

Robert Friberg et al

Hibernating Rhinos

Sphinx Technologies Inc.

Initial release

2017

2009

under the name LiveDB

2010

2001

Current release

5.4, July 2022

3.5.1, February 2023

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

Open Source

AGPL version 3, commercial license available

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

Java, Scala

C++

Server operating systems

Linux
macOS

Linux
Windows

Linux
macOS
Raspberry Pi
Windows

FreeBSD
Linux
NetBSD
OS X
Solaris
Windows

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes: int, bigint, decimal, string

User defined using .NET types and collections

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.

can be achieved using .NET

Secondary indexes

all fields are automatically indexed

yes

full-text index on all search fields

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language

SQL-like query language (RQL)

SQL-like query language (SphinxQL)

APIs and other access methods

gRPC
HTTP REST
WebSocket

.NET Client API
HTTP API
LINQ

.NET Client API
F# Client API
Go Client API
Java Client API
NodeJS Client API
PHP Client API
Python Client API
RESTful HTTP API

Proprietary protocol

Supported programming languages

Java
Scala

.Net

.Net
C#
F#
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
Ruby

C++

unofficial client library
Java
Perl

unofficial client library
PHP
Python
Ruby

unofficial client library

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Triggers

yes

Domain Events

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

horizontal partitioning

client side managed; servers are not synchronized

Sharding

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

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Source-replica replication

Multi-source replication

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Eventual Consistency

Default ACID transactions on the local node (eventually consistent across the cluster). Atomic operations with cluster-wide ACID transactions. Eventual consistency for indexes and full-text search indexes.

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

depending on model

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

ACID, Cluster-wide transaction available

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

Using Apache Lucene

yes

Write ahead log

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

Role based authorization

Authorization levels configured per client per database

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

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

show all

Recent citations in the news

RavenDB Launches Version 6.0 Lightning Fast Queries, Data Integrations, Corax Indexing Engine, and Sharding
3 October 2023, PR Newswire

Install the NoSQL RavenDB Data System
14 May 2021, The New Stack

RavenDB Welcomes David Baruc as Chief Revenue Officer: Seasoned Tech Leader to Drive Global Sales and Accelerate Growth
13 June 2023, PR Newswire

Get To Know: Oren Eini, CEO, RavenDB
22 October 2019, intelligentcio.com

RavenDB Adds Graph Queries
15 May 2019, Datanami

provided by Google News

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

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

Beyond the Concert Hall: 5 Organizations Making a Difference in Classical Music in 2018
22 December 2018, WQXR Radio

Here’s Why Russia Is Cracking Down on Google
23 February 2015, TIME

The Pirate Bay was recently down for over a week due to a DDoS attack
29 October 2019, The Hacker News

provided by Google News

Share this page