We performed a comparison between Milvus and Percona Server based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Open Source Databases solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution is well containerized, and since containerization is quick and easy for me, I can scale it up quickly."
"I like the accuracy and usability."
"Milvus has good accuracy and performance."
"The best feature of Milvus was finding the closest chunk from a huge amount of data."
"We find the product mostly stable."
"Milvus' documentation is not very user-friendly and doesn't help me get started quickly."
"Milvus could make it simpler. Simplifying the requirements and making it more accessible. It could be more user-friendly."
"I've heard that when we store too much data in Milvus, it becomes slow and does not work properly."
"Milvus has higher resource consumption, which introduces complexity in implementation."
"If Percona had flashback capabilities, it would be ideal."
Milvus is ranked 11th in Open Source Databases with 4 reviews while Percona Server is ranked 8th in Open Source Databases with 2 reviews. Milvus is rated 7.6, while Percona Server is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Milvus writes "Provides quick and easy containerization, but documentation is not very user-friendly". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Percona Server writes "Open-source and free to use with a good community". Milvus is most compared with Elastic Search, Faiss, LanceDB, Chroma and OpenSearch, whereas Percona Server is most compared with MariaDB, MySQL, EDB Postgres Advanced Server, PostgreSQL and Oracle MySQL Cloud Service. See our Milvus vs. Percona Server report.
See our list of best Open Source Databases vendors.
We monitor all Open Source Databases reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.