DBMS > Amazon Aurora vs. Coveo vs. Oracle Berkeley DB vs. SAP HANA

System Properties Comparison Amazon Aurora vs. Coveo vs. Oracle Berkeley DB vs. SAP HANA

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

AI-powered hosted search, recommendation and personalization platform providing tools for both low-code and full-code development

Widely used in-process key-value store

In-memory, column based data store. Available as appliance or cloud service

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Search engine

Key-value store

supports sorted and unsorted key sets
Native XML DBMS

in the Oracle Berkeley DB XML version

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store

Document store
Graph DBMS

with SAP Hana, Enterprise Edition
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	7.57
Rank	#51	Overall
	#32	Relational DBMS

Score	2.11
Rank	#118	Overall
	#11	Search engines

Score	2.01
Rank	#126	Overall
	#21	Key-value stores
	#3	Native XML DBMS

Score	44.27
Rank	#23	Overall
	#16	Relational DBMS

Website

aws.amazon.com/rds/aurora

www.coveo.com

www.oracle.com/database/technologies/related/berkeleydb.html

www.sap.com/products/hana.html

Technical documentation

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

docs.coveo.com

docs.oracle.com/cd/E17076_05/html/index.html

help.sap.com/hana

Developer

Amazon

Coveo

Oracle

originally developed by Sleepycat, which was acquired by Oracle

SAP

Initial release

2015

2012

1994

2010

Current release

18.1.40, May 2020

2.0 SPS07 (April 4, 2023), April 2023

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

commercial license available

commercial

Cloud-based only

Only available as a cloud service

yes

also available as a cloud based service

DBaaS offerings (sponsored links)

Database as a Service

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

Implementation language

C, Java, C++ (depending on the Berkeley DB edition)

Server operating systems

hosted

AIX
Android
FreeBSD
iOS
Linux
OS X
Solaris
VxWorks
Windows

Appliance or cloud-service

Data scheme

yes

hybrid - fields need to be configured prior to indexing, but relationships can be exploited at query time without pre-configuration

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

only with the Berkeley DB XML edition

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

SQL interfaced based on SQLite is available

yes

APIs and other access methods

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

RESTful HTTP API

JDBC
ODBC

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#
Java
JavaScript
Python

.Net

Figaro is a .Net framework assembly that extends Berkeley DB XML into an embeddable database engine for .NET
others

Third-party libraries to manipulate Berkeley DB files are available for many languages
C
C#
C++
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)

3rd party binding
Perl
Python
Tcl

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

SQLScript, R

Triggers

yes

only for the SQL API

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

horizontal partitioning

yes

none

yes

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Source-replica replication

yes

Source-replica replication

yes

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

yes

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

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

granular access controls, API key management, content filters

yes

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.