DBMS > Apache Kylin vs. Faircom DB vs. Lovefield vs. Microsoft SQL Server vs. TerarkDB

System Properties Comparison Apache Kylin vs. Faircom DB vs. Lovefield vs. Microsoft SQL Server vs. TerarkDB

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

A distributed analytics engine for big data, providing a SQL interface and multi-dimensional analysis (OLAP) and leveraging the Hadoop stack

Native high-speed multi-model DBMS for relational and key-value store data simultaneously accessible through SQL and NoSQL APIs.

Embeddable relational database for web apps written in pure JavaScript

Microsofts flagship relational DBMS

A key-value store forked from RocksDB with advanced compression algorithms. It can be used standalone or as a storage engine for MySQL and MongoDB

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Key-value store
Relational DBMS

Relational DBMS

Key-value store

Secondary database models

Document store
Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	1.20
Rank	#175	Overall
	#80	Relational DBMS

Score	0.24
Rank	#311	Overall
	#44	Key-value stores
	#140	Relational DBMS

Score	0.32
Rank	#290	Overall
	#132	Relational DBMS

Score	829.80
Rank	#3	Overall
	#3	Relational DBMS

Score	0.04
Rank	#377	Overall
	#58	Key-value stores

Website

kylin.apache.org

www.faircom.com/products/faircom-db

google.github.io/lovefield

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

github.com/bytedance/terarkdb

Technical documentation

kylin.apache.org/docs

docs.faircom.com/docs/en/UUID-7446ae34-a1a7-c843-c894-d5322e395184.html

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

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

bytedance.larkoffice.com/docs/doccnZmYFqHBm06BbvYgjsHHcKc

Developer

Apache Software Foundation, originally contributed from eBay Inc

FairCom Corporation

Google

Microsoft

ByteDance, originally Terark

Initial release

2015

1979

2014

1989

2016

Current release

3.1.0, July 2020

V12, November 2020

2.1.12, February 2017

SQL Server 2022, November 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

commercial

Restricted, free version available

Open Source

Apache 2.0

commercial

restricted free version is available

commercial

restricted open source version 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

ANSI C, C++

JavaScript

C++

Server operating systems

Linux

AIX
FreeBSD
HP-UX
Linux
NetBSD
OS X
QNX
SCO
Solaris
VxWorks
Windows

easily portable to other OSs

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

tested with Chrome, Firefox, IE, Safari

Linux
Windows

Data scheme

yes

schema free, schema optional, schema required, partial schema,

yes

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

yes, ANSI SQL Types, JSON, typed binary structures

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

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

ANSI SQL for queries (using Apache Calcite)

yes, ANSI SQL with proprietary extensions

SQL-like query language

via JavaScript builder pattern

yes

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET
Direct SQL
JDBC
JPA
ODBC
RESTful HTTP/JSON API
RESTful MQTT/JSON API
RPC

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

C++ API
Java API

Supported programming languages

.Net
C
C#
C++
Java
JavaScript (Node.js and browser)
PHP
Python
Visual Basic

JavaScript

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

C++
Java

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

.Net, JavaScript, C/C++

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

Triggers

yes

Using read-only observers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

File partitioning, horizontal partitioning, sharding

Customizable business rules for table partitioning

none

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

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes, configurable to be parallel or serial, synchronous or asynchronous, uni-directional or bi-directional, ACID-consistent or eventually consistent (with custom conflict resolution).

none

yes, but depending on the SQL-Server Edition

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency
Tunable consistency per server, database, table, and transaction

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

tunable from ACID to Eventually Consistent

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

Yes, tunable from durable to delayed durability to in-memory

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

User concepts

Access control

Fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard with additional protections for files

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.