StackShareStackShare
Follow on
StackShare

Discover and share technology stacks from companies around the world.

Follow on

© 2025 StackShare. All rights reserved.

Product

  • Stacks
  • Tools
  • Feed

Company

  • About
  • Contact

Legal

  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service
  1. Stackups
  2. Utilities
  3. Search
  4. Search Tools
  5. Lucene vs Solr vs Sphinx

Lucene vs Solr vs Sphinx

OverviewComparisonAlternatives

Overview

Solr
Solr
Stacks805
Followers644
Votes126
Lucene
Lucene
Stacks175
Followers230
Votes2
Sphinx
Sphinx
Stacks1.1K
Followers300
Votes32

Lucene vs Solr vs Sphinx: What are the differences?

# Introduction
When it comes to full-text search engines, Lucene, Solr, and Sphinx are popular choices. However, they have distinct differences in terms of features, capabilities, and the way they are implemented.

1. **Query Language**: Lucene requires developers to write queries using its own query syntax, which can be more complex for beginners. On the other hand, Solr and Sphinx offer a more user-friendly interface with support for standard query languages like SQL.
   
2. **Scalability**: Solr is built on top of Lucene and offers features for distributed search and scalability out of the box. Sphinx, on the other hand, may require more effort to set up and scale for large datasets.
   
3. **Community Support**: Solr has a larger and more active community compared to Lucene and Sphinx. This means that developers can find more resources, tutorials, and expertise when using Solr for their projects.
   
4. **Indexing Speed**: Sphinx is often praised for its fast indexing speed, making it a great choice for applications that require real-time indexing of large datasets. In contrast, Lucene and Solr may not be as fast in indexing large volumes of data.
   
5. **Features and Extensions**: Solr comes with a wide range of built-in features and extensions that make it suitable for a variety of use cases. Lucene, on the other hand, may require more customization to achieve the same level of functionality. Sphinx has a more limited set of features compared to Solr and may not be as versatile for complex search requirements.
   
6. **Ease of Use**: Solr is known for its ease of use and configuration, making it a popular choice for developers looking for a quick setup. Lucene and Sphinx, on the other hand, may require more technical expertise and configuration to get started.

In Summary, Lucene, Solr, and Sphinx have key differences in query language, scalability, community support, indexing speed, features, and ease of use.

Share your Stack

Help developers discover the tools you use. Get visibility for your team's tech choices and contribute to the community's knowledge.

View Docs
CLI (Node.js)
or
Manual

Detailed Comparison

Solr
Solr
Lucene
Lucene
Sphinx
Sphinx

Solr is the popular, blazing fast open source enterprise search platform from the Apache Lucene project. Its major features include powerful full-text search, hit highlighting, faceted search, near real-time indexing, dynamic clustering, database integration, rich document (e.g., Word, PDF) handling, and geospatial search. Solr is highly reliable, scalable and fault tolerant, providing distributed indexing, replication and load-balanced querying, automated failover and recovery, centralized configuration and more. Solr powers the search and navigation features of many of the world's largest internet sites.

Lucene Core, our flagship sub-project, provides Java-based indexing and search technology, as well as spellchecking, hit highlighting and advanced analysis/tokenization capabilities.

It lets you either batch index and search data stored in an SQL database, NoSQL storage, or just files quickly and easily — or index and search data on the fly, working with it pretty much as with a database server.

Advanced full-text search capabilities; Optimized for high volume web traffic; Standards-based open interfaces - XML, JSON and HTTP; Comprehensive HTML administration interfaces; Server statistics exposed over JMX for monitoring; Linearly scalable, auto index replication, auto-failover and recovery; Near real-time indexing; Flexible and adaptable with XML configuration; Extensible plugin architecture
over 150GB/hour on modern hardware;small RAM requirements -- only 1MB heap;incremental indexing as fast as batch indexing;index size roughly 20-30% the size of text indexed;ranked searching -- best results returned first;many powerful query types: phrase queries, wildcard queries, proximity queries, range queries;fielded searching (e.g. title, author, contents);sorting by any field;multiple-index searching with merged results;allows simultaneous update and searching;flexible faceting, highlighting, joins and result grouping;fast, memory-efficient and typo-tolerant suggesters;pluggable ranking models, including the Vector Space Model and Okapi BM25;configurable storage engine (codecs)
Output formats: HTML (including Windows HTML Help), LaTeX (for printable PDF versions), ePub, Texinfo, manual pages, plain text;Extensive cross-references: semantic markup and automatic links for functions, classes, citations, glossary terms and similar pieces of information;Hierarchical structure: easy definition of a document tree, with automatic links to siblings, parents and children;Automatic indices: general index as well as a language-specific module indices;Code handling: automatic highlighting using the Pygments highlighter;Extensions: automatic testing of code snippets, inclusion of docstrings from Python modules (API docs), and more
Statistics
Stacks
805
Stacks
175
Stacks
1.1K
Followers
644
Followers
230
Followers
300
Votes
126
Votes
2
Votes
32
Pros & Cons
Pros
  • 35
    Powerful
  • 22
    Indexing and searching
  • 20
    Scalable
  • 19
    Customizable
  • 13
    Enterprise Ready
Pros
  • 1
    Fast
  • 1
    Small
Pros
  • 16
    Fast
  • 9
    Simple deployment
  • 6
    Open source
  • 1
    Lots of extentions
Integrations
No integrations available
Java
Java
DevDocs
DevDocs
Zapier
Zapier
Google Drive
Google Drive
Google Chrome
Google Chrome
Dropbox
Dropbox

What are some alternatives to Solr, Lucene, Sphinx?

Algolia

Algolia

Our mission is to make you a search expert. Push data to our API to make it searchable in real time. Build your dream front end with one of our web or mobile UI libraries. Tune relevance and get analytics right from your dashboard.

MkDocs

MkDocs

It builds completely static HTML sites that you can host on GitHub pages, Amazon S3, or anywhere else you choose. There's a stack of good looking themes available. The built-in dev-server allows you to preview your documentation as you're writing it. It will even auto-reload and refresh your browser whenever you save your changes.

Dejavu

Dejavu

dejaVu fits the unmet need of being a hackable data browser for Elasticsearch. Existing browsers were either built with a legacy UI and had a lacking user experience or used server side rendering (I am looking at you, Kibana).

Elassandra

Elassandra

Elassandra is a fork of Elasticsearch modified to run on top of Apache Cassandra in a scalable and resilient peer-to-peer architecture. Elasticsearch code is embedded in Cassanda nodes providing advanced search features on Cassandra tables and Cassandra serve as an Elasticsearch data and configuration store.

Tantivy

Tantivy

It is a full-text search engine library inspired by Apache Lucene and written in Rust. It is not an off-the-shelf search engine server, but rather a crate that can be used to build such a search engine.

Jina

Jina

It is geared towards building search systems for any kind of data, including text, images, audio, video and many more. With the modular design & multi-layer abstraction, you can leverage the efficient patterns to build the system by parts, or chaining them into a Flow for an end-to-end experience.

Google

Google

Search the world's information, including webpages, images, videos and more. Google has many special features to help you find exactly what you're looking for.

YugabyteDB

YugabyteDB

An open-source, high-performance, distributed SQL database built for resilience and scale. Re-uses the upper half of PostgreSQL to offer advanced RDBMS features, architected to be fully distributed like Google Spanner.

Mirage

Mirage

The Elasticsearch query DSL supports 100+ query APIs ranging from full-text search, numeric range filters, geolocation queries to nested and span queries. Mirage is a modern, open-source web based query explorer for Elasticsearch.

Searchkick

Searchkick

Searchkick learns what your users are looking for. As more people search, it gets smarter and the results get better. It’s friendly for developers - and magical for your users.

Related Comparisons

Postman
Swagger UI

Postman vs Swagger UI

Mapbox
Google Maps

Google Maps vs Mapbox

Mapbox
Leaflet

Leaflet vs Mapbox vs OpenLayers

Twilio SendGrid
Mailgun

Mailgun vs Mandrill vs SendGrid

Runscope
Postman

Paw vs Postman vs Runscope