DBMS > Amazon Aurora vs. Google Cloud Bigtable vs. Hazelcast vs. OrigoDB vs. SQLite

System Properties Comparison Amazon Aurora vs. Google Cloud Bigtable vs. Hazelcast vs. OrigoDB vs. SQLite

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

MySQL and PostgreSQL compatible cloud service by Amazon

Google's NoSQL Big Data database service. It's the same database that powers many core Google services, including Search, Analytics, Maps, and Gmail.

A widely adopted in-memory data grid

A fully ACID in-memory object graph database

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Key-value store
Wide column store

Key-value store

Document store
Object oriented DBMS

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store

JSON support with IMDG 3.12

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

Score	7.91
Rank	#50	Overall
	#32	Relational DBMS

Score	3.26
Rank	#92	Overall
	#13	Key-value stores
	#8	Wide column stores

Score	5.97
Rank	#57	Overall
	#6	Key-value stores

Score	0.00
Rank	#383	Overall
	#53	Document stores
	#20	Object oriented DBMS

Score	114.32
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Website

aws.amazon.com/rds/aurora

cloud.google.com/bigtable

hazelcast.com

origodb.com

www.sqlite.org

Technical documentation

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

cloud.google.com/bigtable/docs

hazelcast.org/imdg/docs

origodb.com/docs

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

Developer

Amazon

Google

Hazelcast

Robert Friberg et al

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Initial release

2015

2008

2009

under the name LiveDB

2000

Current release

5.3.6, November 2023

3.46.0 (23 May 2024), May 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache Version 2; commercial licenses available

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

Server operating systems

hosted

All OS with a Java VM

Linux
Windows

server-less

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

yes

dynamic column types

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

User defined using .NET types and collections

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

can be achieved using .NET

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

SQL-like query language

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

APIs and other access methods

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

gRPC (using protocol buffers) API
HappyBase (Python library)
HBase compatible API (Java)

JCache
JPA
Memcached protocol
RESTful HTTP API

.NET Client API
HTTP API
LINQ

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

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

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

.Net

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

Event Listeners, Executor Services

yes

Triggers

yes

Events

yes

Domain Events

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

horizontal partitioning

Sharding

horizontal partitioning

client side managed; servers are not synchronized

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Source-replica replication

Internal replication in Colossus, and regional replication between two clusters in different zones

yes

Replicated Map

Source-replica replication

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Immediate consistency (for a single cluster), Eventual consistency (for two or more replicated clusters)

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency selectable by user

Raft Consensus Algorithm

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

depending on model

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Atomic single-row operations

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

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

via file-system locks

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

Write ahead log

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

Access rights for users, groups and roles based on Google Cloud Identity and Access Management (IAM)

Role-based access control

Role based authorization

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.