DBMS > Amazon DocumentDB vs. Dgraph vs. ScyllaDB vs. SQLite vs. Yaacomo

System Properties Comparison Amazon DocumentDB vs. Dgraph vs. ScyllaDB vs. SQLite vs. Yaacomo

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Yaacomo seems to be discontinued and is removed from the DB-Engines ranking

Description

Fast, scalable, highly available, and fully managed MongoDB-compatible database service

Distributed and scalable native Graph DBMS

Cassandra and DynamoDB compatible wide column store

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

OpenCL based in-memory RDBMS, designed for efficiently utilizing the hardware via parallel computing

Primary database model

Secondary database models

Key-value store

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

Score	1.91
Rank	#132	Overall
	#24	Document stores

Score	1.45
Rank	#156	Overall
	#15	Graph DBMS

Score	4.75
Rank	#68	Overall
	#5	Wide column stores

Score	114.32
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Website

aws.amazon.com/documentdb

dgraph.io

www.scylladb.com

www.sqlite.org

yaacomo.com

Technical documentation

aws.amazon.com/documentdb/resources

dgraph.io/docs

docs.scylladb.com

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

Developer

Dgraph Labs, Inc.

ScyllaDB

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Q2WEB GmbH

Initial release

2019

2016

2015

2000

2009

Current release

ScyllaDB Open Source 5.4.1, January 2024

3.45.3 (15 April 2024), April 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

Open Source (AGPL), commercial license available

Open Source

Public Domain

commercial

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.

Scylla Cloud: Create real-time applications that run at global scale with Scylla Cloud, the industry’s most powerful NoSQL DBaaS

Implementation language

C++

Server operating systems

hosted

Linux
OS X
Windows

Linux

server-less

Android
Linux
Windows

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

dynamic column types

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

not rigid because of 'dynamic typing' concept.

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.

Secondary indexes

yes

cluster global secondary indices

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like DML and DDL statements (CQL)

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

yes

APIs and other access methods

proprietary protocol using JSON (MongoDB compatible)

GraphQL query language
gRPC (using protocol buffers) API
HTTP API

Proprietary protocol (CQL)

compatible with CQL (Cassandra Query Language, an SQL-like language)
RESTful HTTP API (DynamoDB compatible)
Thrift

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python

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

For CQL interface: C#, C++, Clojure, Erlang, Go, Haskell, Java, JavaScript, Node.js, Perl, PHP, Python, Ruby, Rust, Scala
For DynamoDB interface: .Net, ColdFusion, Erlang, Groovy, Java, JavaScript, Perl, PHP, Python, Ruby

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, Lua

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

yes

Sharding

none

horizontal partitioning

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-availability zones for high availability, asynchronous replication for up to 15 read replicas

Synchronous replication via Raft

selectable replication factor

Representation of geographical distribution of servers is possible

none

Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

may be implemented via Amazon Elastic MapReduce (Amazon EMR)

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency
Tunable Consistency

can be individually decided for each write operation

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

typically not used, however similar functionality with DBRef possible

yes

Transaction concepts

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

Atomic single-document operations

ACID

Atomicity and isolation are supported for single operations

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

via file-system locks

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

in-memory tables

yes

User concepts

Access control

Access rights for users and roles

Planned for future releases

Access rights for users can be defined per object

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

More information provided by the system vendor

Specific characteristics

ScyllaDB is engineered to deliver predictable performance at scale. It’s adopted...
» more

Competitive advantages

Highly-performant (efficiently utilizes full resources of a node and network; millions...
» more

Typical application scenarios

ScyllaDB is ideal for applications that require high throughput and low latency at...
» more

Key customers

Discord, Epic Games, Expedia, Zillow, Comcast, Disney+ Hotstar, Samsung, ShareChat,...
» more

Market metrics

ScyllaDB typically offers ~75% total cost of ownership savings, with ~5X higher throughput...
» more

Licensing and pricing models

ScyllaDB Open Source - free open source software (AGPL) ScyllaDB Enterprise - subscription-based...
» more

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.