DBMS > Badger vs. Hyprcubd vs. Microsoft Azure SQL Database vs. SQLite

System Properties Comparison Badger vs. Hyprcubd vs. Microsoft Azure SQL Database vs. SQLite

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

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

Description

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

Serverless Time Series DBMS

Database as a Service offering with high compatibility to Microsoft SQL Server

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

Primary database model

Key-value store

Time Series DBMS

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	0.14
Rank	#331	Overall
	#49	Key-value stores

Score	77.99
Rank	#16	Overall
	#11	Relational DBMS

Score	114.32
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Website

github.com/dgraph-io/badger

hyprcubd.com (offline)

azure.microsoft.com/en-us/products/azure-sql/database

www.sqlite.org

Technical documentation

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

docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/azure-sql

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

Developer

DGraph Labs

Hyprcubd, Inc.

Microsoft

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Initial release

2017

2010

2000

Current release

V12

3.45.3 (15 April 2024), April 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache 2.0

commercial

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++

Server operating systems

BSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

hosted

server-less

Data scheme

schema-free

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.

yes

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

APIs and other access methods

gRPC (https)

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

Supported programming languages

.Net
C#
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
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

Transact SQL

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

yes, with always 3 replicas available

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

none

Eventual Consistency

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

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

token access

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.