DBMS > BigObject vs. etcd vs. FatDB vs. PlanetScale

System Properties Comparison BigObject vs. etcd vs. FatDB vs. PlanetScale

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

FatDB/FatCloud has ceased operations as a company with February 2014. FatDB is discontinued and excluded from the ranking.

Description

Analytic DBMS for real-time computations and queries

A distributed reliable key-value store

A .NET NoSQL DBMS that can integrate with and extend SQL Server.

Scalable, distributed, serverless MySQL database platform built on top of Vitess

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

a hierachical model (tree) can be imposed

Key-value store

Document store
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	0.13
Rank	#333	Overall
	#147	Relational DBMS

Score	7.25
Rank	#54	Overall
	#5	Key-value stores

Score	1.59
Rank	#151	Overall
	#70	Relational DBMS

Website

bigobject.io

etcd.io
github.com/etcd-io/etcd

planetscale.com

Technical documentation

docs.bigobject.io

etcd.io/docs
github.com/etcd-io/etcd/tree/master/Documentation

planetscale.com/docs

Developer

BigObject, Inc.

FatCloud

PlanetScale

Initial release

2015

2012

2020

Current release

3.4, August 2019

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free community edition available

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

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

Server operating systems

Linux

distributed as a docker-image
OS X

distributed as a docker-image (boot2docker)
Windows

distributed as a docker-image (boot2docker)

FreeBSD
Linux
Windows

experimental

Windows

Docker
Linux
macOS

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

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 DML and DDL statements

Via inetgration in SQL Server

yes

with proprietary extensions

APIs and other access methods

fluentd
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

gRPC
JSON over HTTP

.NET Client API
LINQ
RESTful HTTP API
RPC
Windows WCF Bindings

ADO.NET
JDBC
MySQL protocol
ODBC

Supported programming languages

.Net
C
C++
Clojure
Erlang
Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Perl
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Rust
Scala
Tcl

Ada
C
C#
C++
D
Delphi
Eiffel
Erlang
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scheme
Tcl

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Lua

yes

via applications

yes

proprietary syntax

Triggers

yes, watching key changes

yes

via applications

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

Using Raft consensus algorithm to ensure data replication with strong consistency among multiple replicas.

selectable replication factor

Multi-source replication
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

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency across shards
Immediate Consistency within a shard

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

automatically between fact table and dimension tables

yes

not for MyISAM storage engine

Transaction concepts

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

ACID at shard level

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Read/write lock on objects (tables, trees)

yes

table locks or row locks depending on storage engine

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

Can implement custom security layer via applications

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

no user groups or roles

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

Monitor Amazon EKS Control Plane metrics using AWS Open Source monitoring services | Amazon Web Services
12 October 2023, AWS Blog

RBI reiterates need for underlying forex exposure for rupee derivatives transactions | Stock Market News
5 April 2024, Mint

Killing a market, softly: How an RBI communique could end India's thriving ETCD market
7 April 2024, The Economic Times

6 Cool Kubernetes Operators and How to Use Them
22 January 2024, hackernoon.com

Public preview: AKS cluster control plane metrics in managed Prometheus | Azure updates
12 February 2024, Microsoft

provided by Google News

PlanetScale ends free tier bid, sheds staff in profitability bid
11 March 2024, The Register

PlanetScale Ranked Number 188 Fastest-Growing Company in North America on the 2023 Deloitte Technology Fast ...
8 November 2023, businesswire.com

PlanetScale forks MySQL to add vector support
3 October 2023, TechCrunch

PlanetScale Named to Fortune 2023 Best Small Workplaces
31 August 2023, businesswire.com

How to Migrate to PlanetScale's Serverless Database
14 October 2021, The New Stack

provided by Google News

Share this page