DBMS > Badger vs. FeatureBase vs. IBM Cloudant vs. JaguarDB vs. SQLite

System Properties Comparison Badger vs. FeatureBase vs. IBM Cloudant vs. JaguarDB vs. SQLite

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

An embeddable, persistent, simple and fast Key-Value Store, written purely in Go.

Real-time database platform that powers real-time analytics and machine learning applications by simultaneously executing low-latency, high-throughput, and highly concurrent workloads.

Database as a Service offering based on Apache CouchDB

Performant, highly scalable DBMS for AI and IoT applications

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

Primary database model

Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Document store

Key-value store
Vector DBMS

Relational DBMS

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

Score	0.14
Rank	#328	Overall
	#48	Key-value stores

Score	0.23
Rank	#296	Overall
	#134	Relational DBMS

Score	2.85
Rank	#95	Overall
	#18	Document stores

Score	0.00
Rank	#385	Overall
	#61	Key-value stores
	#16	Vector DBMS

Score	103.35
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Website

github.com/dgraph-io/badger

www.featurebase.com

www.ibm.com/products/cloudant

www.jaguardb.com

www.sqlite.org

Technical documentation

godoc.org/github.com/dgraph-io/badger

docs.featurebase.com

cloud.ibm.com/docs/Cloudant

www.jaguardb.com/support.html

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

Developer

DGraph Labs

Molecula and Pilosa Open Source Contributors

IBM, Apache Software Foundation

IBM acquired Cloudant in February 2014

DataJaguar, Inc.

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Initial release

2017

2010

2015

2000

Current release

2022, May 2022

3.3 July 2023

3.46.1 (13 August 2024), August 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache 2.0

commercial

Open Source

GPL V3.0

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

Erlang

C++

the server part. Clients available in other languages

Server operating systems

BSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

Linux
macOS

hosted

Linux

server-less

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

schema-free

yes

dynamic column types

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

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

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL queries

A subset of ANSI SQL is implemented

but no views, foreign keys, triggers

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

APIs and other access methods

gRPC
JDBC
Kafka Connector
ODBC

RESTful HTTP/JSON API

JDBC
ODBC

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

Supported programming languages

Java
Python

C#
Java
JavaScript
Objective-C
PHP
Ruby

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

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

View functions (Map-Reduce) in JavaScript

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

yes

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

Multi-source replication

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

none

Eventual Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

yes

atomic operations within a document possible

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Optimistic locking

yes

via file-system locks

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

yes, using Linux fsync

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 can be defined per database

rights management via user accounts

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.