DBMS > Amazon Aurora vs. Apache Drill vs. LevelDB vs. MySQL

System Properties Comparison Amazon Aurora vs. Apache Drill vs. LevelDB vs. MySQL

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

MySQL and PostgreSQL compatible cloud service by Amazon

Schema-free SQL Query Engine for Hadoop, NoSQL and Cloud Storage

Embeddable fast key-value storage library that provides an ordered mapping from string keys to string values

Widely used open source RDBMS

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Document store
Relational DBMS

Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Key/Value like access via memcached API

Secondary database models

Document store

Document store
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	7.91
Rank	#50	Overall
	#32	Relational DBMS

Score	1.95
Rank	#127	Overall
	#23	Document stores
	#60	Relational DBMS

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

Score	1083.74
Rank	#2	Overall
	#2	Relational DBMS

Website

aws.amazon.com/rds/aurora

drill.apache.org

github.com/google/leveldb

www.mysql.com

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonRDS/latest/AuroraUserGuide/CHAP_Aurora.html

drill.apache.org/docs

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

dev.mysql.com/doc

Developer

Amazon

Apache Software Foundation

Google

Oracle

since 2010, originally MySQL AB, then Sun

Initial release

2015

2012

2011

1995

Current release

1.20.3, January 2023

1.23, February 2021

8.4.0, April 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache Version 2

Open Source

BSD

Open Source

GPL version 2. Commercial licenses with extended functionallity are available

Cloud-based only

Only available as a cloud service

yes

DBaaS offerings (sponsored links)

Database as a Service

Providers of DBaaS offerings, please contact us to be listed.

Aiven for MySQL: Fully managed MySQL, deployable in the cloud of your choice, with seamless integrations and lightning-fast setup.

Implementation language

C++

C and C++

Server operating systems

hosted

Linux
OS X
Windows

Illumos
Linux
OS X
Windows

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
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

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

SQL SELECT statement is SQL:2003 compliant

yes

with proprietary extensions

APIs and other access methods

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

JDBC
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
Proprietary native API

Supported programming languages

Ada
C
C#
C++
D
Delphi
Eiffel
Erlang
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scheme
Tcl

C++

C++
Go
Java

3rd party binding
JavaScript (Node.js)

3rd party binding
Python

3rd party binding

Ada
C
C#
C++
D
Delphi
Eiffel
Erlang
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scheme
Tcl

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

user defined functions

yes

proprietary syntax

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

horizontal partitioning

Sharding

none

horizontal partitioning, sharding with MySQL Cluster or MySQL Fabric

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Source-replica replication

none

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

none

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

not for MyISAM storage engine

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

not for MyISAM storage engine

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

table locks or row locks depending on storage engine

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

Depending on the underlying data source

yes

with automatic compression on writes

yes

In-memory capabilities

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

yes

Depending on the underlying data source

yes

User concepts

Access control

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Depending on the underlying data source

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

no user groups or 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.