DBMS > Apache Drill vs. Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Ehcache vs. Microsoft SQL Server vs. Oracle Berkeley DB

System Properties Comparison Apache Drill vs. Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Ehcache vs. Microsoft SQL Server vs. Oracle Berkeley DB

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

This system has been discontinued and will be removed from the DB-Engines ranking.

Description

Schema-free SQL Query Engine for Hadoop, NoSQL and Cloud Storage

Highly scalable database system, designed for managing session and subscriber data in modern mobile communication networks

A widely adopted Java cache with tiered storage options

Microsofts flagship relational DBMS

Widely used in-process key-value store

Primary database model

Document store
Relational DBMS

Document store
Key-value store

Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Key-value store

supports sorted and unsorted key sets
Native XML DBMS

in the Oracle Berkeley DB XML version

Secondary database models

Document store
Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	1.95
Rank	#127	Overall
	#23	Document stores
	#60	Relational DBMS

Score	4.89
Rank	#67	Overall
	#8	Key-value stores

Score	824.29
Rank	#3	Overall
	#3	Relational DBMS

Score	2.21
Rank	#117	Overall
	#20	Key-value stores
	#3	Native XML DBMS

Website

drill.apache.org

atos.net/en/convergence-creators/portfolio/standard-common-repository

www.ehcache.org

www.microsoft.com/en-us/sql-server

www.oracle.com/database/technologies/related/berkeleydb.html

Technical documentation

drill.apache.org/docs

www.ehcache.org/documentation

learn.microsoft.com/en-US/sql/sql-server

docs.oracle.com/cd/E17076_05/html/index.html

Developer

Apache Software Foundation

Atos Convergence Creators

Terracotta Inc, owned by Software AG

Microsoft

Oracle

originally developed by Sleepycat, which was acquired by Oracle

Initial release

2012

2016

2009

1989

1994

Current release

1.20.3, January 2023

1703

3.10.0, March 2022

SQL Server 2022, November 2022

18.1.40, May 2020

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache Version 2

commercial

Open Source

Apache Version 2; commercial licenses available

commercial

restricted free version is available

Open Source

commercial license available

Cloud-based only

Only available as a cloud service

DBaaS offerings (sponsored links)

Database as a Service

Providers of DBaaS offerings, please contact us to be listed.

Implementation language

Java

C++

C, Java, C++ (depending on the Berkeley DB edition)

Server operating systems

Linux
OS X
Windows

Linux

All OS with a Java VM

Linux
Windows

AIX
Android
FreeBSD
iOS
Linux
OS X
Solaris
VxWorks
Windows

Data scheme

schema-free

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

schema-free

yes

schema-free

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.

yes

only with the Berkeley DB XML edition

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL SELECT statement is SQL:2003 compliant

yes

SQL interfaced based on SQLite is available

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

LDAP

JCache

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
OLE DB
Tabular Data Stream (TDS)

Supported programming languages

C++

All languages with LDAP bindings

Java

C#
C++
Delphi
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Visual Basic

.Net

Figaro is a .Net framework assembly that extends Berkeley DB XML into an embeddable database engine for .NET
others

Third-party libraries to manipulate Berkeley DB files are available for many languages
C
C#
C++
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)

3rd party binding
Perl
Python
Tcl

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

Transact SQL, .NET languages, R, Python and (with SQL Server 2019) Java

Triggers

yes

Cache Event Listeners

yes

only for the SQL API

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

Sharding

by using Terracotta Server

tables can be distributed across several files (horizontal partitioning); sharding through federation

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

by using Terracotta Server

yes, but depending on the SQL-Server Edition

Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

none

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration

Tunable Consistency (Strong, Eventual, Weak)

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

Atomic execution of specific operations

yes

supports JTA and can work as an XA resource

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

Depending on the underlying data source

yes

using a tiered cache-storage approach

yes

In-memory capabilities

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

Depending on the underlying data source

yes

User concepts

Access control

Depending on the underlying data source

LDAP bind authentication

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.