DBMS > Amazon DocumentDB vs. Lovefield vs. Oracle NoSQL vs. Yaacomo

System Properties Comparison Amazon DocumentDB vs. Lovefield vs. Oracle NoSQL vs. Yaacomo

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

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

Embeddable relational database for web apps written in pure JavaScript

A multi-model, scalable, distributed NoSQL database, designed to provide highly reliable, flexible, and available data management across a configurable set of storage nodes

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

Primary database model

Document store

Relational DBMS

Document store
Key-value store
Relational DBMS

Relational DBMS

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

Score	1.91
Rank	#132	Overall
	#24	Document stores

Score	0.29
Rank	#293	Overall
	#133	Relational DBMS

Score	2.95
Rank	#100	Overall
	#17	Document stores
	#17	Key-value stores
	#50	Relational DBMS

Website

aws.amazon.com/documentdb

google.github.io/lovefield

www.oracle.com/database/nosql/technologies/nosql

yaacomo.com

Technical documentation

aws.amazon.com/documentdb/resources

github.com/google/lovefield/blob/master/docs/spec_index.md

docs.oracle.com/en/database/other-databases/nosql-database/index.html

Developer

Google

Oracle

Q2WEB GmbH

Initial release

2019

2014

2011

2009

Current release

2.1.12, February 2017

23.3, December 2023

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

Proprietary for Enterprise Edition (Oracle Database EE license has Oracle NoSQL database EE covered: details)

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.

Implementation language

JavaScript

Java

Server operating systems

hosted

server-less, requires a JavaScript environment (browser, Node.js)

tested with Chrome, Firefox, IE, Safari

Linux
Solaris SPARC/x86

Android
Linux
Windows

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

Support Fixed schema and Schema-less deployment with the ability to interoperate between them.

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

optional

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

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language

via JavaScript builder pattern

SQL-like DML and DDL statements

yes

APIs and other access methods

proprietary protocol using JSON (MongoDB compatible)

RESTful HTTP API

JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python

JavaScript

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

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Triggers

Using read-only observers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

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

none

Electable source-replica replication per shard. Support distributed global deployment with Multi-region table feature

Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

may be implemented via Amazon Elastic MapReduce (Amazon EMR)

with Hadoop integration

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

depending on configuration

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

configurable

ACID within a storage node (=shard)

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

yes, by using IndexedDB or the cloud service Firebase Realtime Database

yes

In-memory capabilities

Is there an option to define some or all structures to be held in-memory only.

yes

using MemoryDB

yes

off heap cache

yes

User concepts

Access control

Access rights for users and roles

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

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.

Related products and services

We invite representatives of vendors of related products to contact us for presenting information about their offerings here.

More resources

Recent citations in the news

Vector search for Amazon DocumentDB (with MongoDB compatibility) is now generally available | Amazon Web Services
29 November 2023, AWS Blog

AWS announces Amazon DocumentDB I/O-Optimized
21 November 2023, AWS Blog

Reduce cost and improve performance by migrating to Amazon DocumentDB 5.0 | Amazon Web Services
15 April 2024, AWS Blog

AWS announces vector search for Amazon DocumentDB
29 November 2023, AWS Blog

Mask sensitive Amazon DocumentDB log data with Amazon CloudWatch Logs data protection | Amazon Web Services
16 April 2024, AWS Blog

provided by Google News

Enhance enterprise data security and trust: Must see Blockchain Technology sessions at Oracle CloudWorld 2023
21 August 2023, Oracle

We built a geo-distributed, serverless modern app using the Oracle NoSQL Database Cloud Service
18 November 2021, Oracle

Oracle Beefs Up Its NoSQL Database Offering
3 April 2014, Data Center Knowledge

Oracle Defends Relational DBs Against NoSQL Competitors
25 November 2015, eWeek

Larry Ellison Just Embraced the Enemy. Or Did He?
1 October 2012, WIRED

provided by Google News

Share this page