DBMS > Amazon Aurora vs. EXASOL vs. Hazelcast vs. QuestDB vs. SQLite

System Properties Comparison Amazon Aurora vs. EXASOL vs. Hazelcast vs. QuestDB vs. SQLite

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

MySQL and PostgreSQL compatible cloud service by Amazon

High-performance, in-memory, MPP database specifically designed for in-memory analytics.

A widely adopted in-memory data grid

A high performance open source SQL database for time series data

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

Primary database model

Secondary database models

Document store

JSON support with IMDG 3.12

Relational DBMS

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

Score	8.50
Rank	#49	Overall
	#31	Relational DBMS

Score	2.25
Rank	#120	Overall
	#57	Relational DBMS

Score	6.87
Rank	#55	Overall
	#6	Key-value stores

Score	2.48
Rank	#115	Overall
	#9	Time Series DBMS

Score	116.01
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Website

aws.amazon.com/rds/aurora

Technical documentation

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

www.exasol.com/resources

hazelcast.org/imdg/docs

questdb.io/docs

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

Developer

Amazon

Exasol

Hazelcast

QuestDB Technology Inc

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Initial release

2015

2000

2008

2014

2000

Current release

5.3.6, November 2023

3.45.2 (12 March 2024), March 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache Version 2; commercial licenses available

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

Public Domain

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.

Implementation language

Java

Java (Zero-GC), C++, Rust

Server operating systems

hosted

All OS with a Java VM

Linux
macOS
Windows

server-less

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

yes

schema-free via InfluxDB Line Protocol

yes

dynamic column types

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

not rigid because of 'dynamic typing' concept.

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

the object must implement a serialization strategy

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

SQL-like query language

SQL with time-series extensions

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

APIs and other access methods

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

.Net
JDBC
ODBC
WebSocket

JCache
JPA
Memcached protocol
RESTful HTTP API

HTTP REST
InfluxDB Line Protocol (TCP/UDP)
JDBC
PostgreSQL wire protocol

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

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

Java
Lua
Python
R

.Net
C#
C++
Clojure
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python
Scala

PostgreSQL driver
C++
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python
Rust

over HTTP

Actionscript
Ada
Basic
C
C#
C++
D
Delphi
Forth
Fortran
Haskell
Java
JavaScript
Lisp
Lua
MatLab
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
PL/SQL
Python
R
Ruby
Scala
Scheme
Smalltalk
Tcl

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

user defined functions

yes

Event Listeners, Executor Services

Triggers

yes

Events

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

horizontal partitioning

Sharding

horizontal partitioning (by timestamps)

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Source-replica replication

yes

Replicated Map

Source-replica replication with eventual consistency

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Hadoop integration

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency selectable by user

Raft Consensus Algorithm

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

one or two-phase-commit; repeatable reads; read commited

ACID for single-table writes

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

via file-system locks

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

through memory mapped files

yes

User concepts

Access control

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Access rights for users, groups and roles according to SQL-standard

Role-based access control

More information provided by the system vendor

Specific characteristics

Relational model with native time series support Column-based storage and time partitioned...
» more

Competitive advantages

High ingestion throughput: peak of 4M rows/sec (TSBS Benchmark) Code optimizations...
» more

Typical application scenarios

Financial tick data Industrial IoT Application Metrics Monitoring
» more

Key customers

Banks & Hedge funds, Yahoo, OKX, Airbus, Aquis Exchange, Net App, Cloudera, Airtel,...
» more

Licensing and pricing models

Open source Apache 2.0 QuestDB Enterprise QuestDB Cloud
» more

News

Does "vpmovzxbd" Scare You? Here's Why it Doesn't Have To
12 April 2024

Create an ADS-B flight radar with QuestDB and a Raspberry Pi
8 April 2024

Build a temperature IoT sensor with Raspberry Pi Pico & QuestDB
5 April 2024

Create an IoT server with QuestDB and a Raspberry Pi
4 April 2024

TimescaleDB vs. QuestDB: Performance benchmarks and overview
27 March 2024

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.