DBMS > Amazon DocumentDB vs. Hypertable vs. Hyprcubd vs. SiteWhere vs. SQLite

System Properties Comparison Amazon DocumentDB vs. Hypertable vs. Hyprcubd vs. SiteWhere vs. SQLite

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Hypertable has stopped its further development with March 2016 and is removed from the DB-Engines ranking.

Hyprcubd seems to be discontinued. Therefore it is excluded from the DB-Engines ranking.

Description

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

An open source BigTable implementation based on distributed file systems such as Hadoop

Serverless Time Series DBMS

M2M integration platform for persisting/querying time series data

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

Primary database model

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

Score	1.91
Rank	#131	Overall
	#24	Document stores

Score	0.06
Rank	#383	Overall
	#43	Time Series DBMS

Score	111.41
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Website

aws.amazon.com/documentdb

hyprcubd.com (offline)

github.com/sitewhere/sitewhere

www.sqlite.org

Technical documentation

aws.amazon.com/documentdb/resources

sitewhere1.sitewhere.io/index.html

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

Developer

Hypertable Inc.

Hyprcubd, Inc.

SiteWhere

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Initial release

2019

2009

2010

2000

Current release

0.9.8.11, March 2016

3.46.0 (23 May 2024), May 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

GNU version 3. Commercial license available

commercial

Open Source

Common Public Attribution License Version 1.0

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

C++

Java

Server operating systems

hosted

Linux
OS X
Windows

an inofficial Windows port is available

hosted

Linux
OS X
Windows

server-less

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

predefined scheme

yes

dynamic column types

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

time, int, uint, float, string

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.

Secondary indexes

yes

restricted

only exact value or prefix value scans

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

APIs and other access methods

proprietary protocol using JSON (MongoDB compatible)

C++ API
Thrift

gRPC (https)

HTTP REST

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

Supported programming languages

Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python

C++
Java
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

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

based on HBase

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

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

selectable replication factor on file system level

selectable replication factor

based on HBase

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

may be implemented via Amazon Elastic MapReduce (Amazon EMR)

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency

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

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

User concepts

Access control

Access rights for users and roles

token access

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

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.