DBMS > BoltDB vs. Couchbase vs. Hypertable vs. VelocityDB

System Properties Comparison BoltDB vs. Couchbase vs. Hypertable vs. VelocityDB

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Hypertable has stopped its further development with March 2016 and is removed from the DB-Engines ranking.

Description

A distributed document store with integrated cache, a powerful search engine, in-built operational and analytical capabilities, and an embedded mobile database

An open source BigTable implementation based on distributed file systems such as Hadoop

A .NET Object Database that can be embedded/distributed and extended to a graph data model (VelocityGraph)

Primary database model

Key-value store

Document store

Wide column store

Graph DBMS
Object oriented DBMS

Secondary database models

Key-value store

originating from the former Membase product and supporting the Memcached protocol
Spatial DBMS

using the Geocouch extension
Search engine
Time Series DBMS
Vector DBMS

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

Score	0.70
Rank	#225	Overall
	#31	Key-value stores

Score	16.74
Rank	#33	Overall
	#5	Document stores

Score	0.00
Rank	#385	Overall
	#40	Graph DBMS
	#21	Object oriented DBMS

Website

github.com/boltdb/bolt

www.couchbase.com

velocitydb.com

Technical documentation

docs.couchbase.com

velocitydb.com/UserGuide

Developer

Couchbase, Inc.

Hypertable Inc.

VelocityDB Inc

Initial release

2013

2011

2009

2011

Current release

Server: 7.2, June 2023; Mobile: 3.1, March 2022; Couchbase Capella (DBaaS), June 2023

0.9.8.11, March 2016

7.x

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

MIT License

Open Source

Business Source License (BSL 1.1); Commercial licenses also available

Open Source

GNU version 3. Commercial license available

commercial

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

C, C++, Go and Erlang

C++

Server operating systems

BSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

Linux
OS X
Windows

an inofficial Windows port is available

Any that supports .NET

Data scheme

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

restricted

only exact value or prefix value scans

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL++, extends ANSI SQL to JSON for operational, transactional, and analytic use cases

APIs and other access methods

CLI Client
HTTP REST
Kafka Connector
Native language bindings for CRUD, Query, Search and Analytics APIs
Spark Connector
Spring Data

C++ API
Thrift

.Net

Supported programming languages

.Net
C
Go
Java
JavaScript

Node.js
Kotlin
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scala

C++
Java
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby

.Net

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Functions and timers in JavaScript and UDFs in Java, Python, SQL++

Triggers

yes

via the TAP protocol

Callbacks are triggered when data changes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Automatic Sharding

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

Multi-source replication

including cross data center replication
Source-replica replication

selectable replication factor on file system level

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

none

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

selectable on a per-operation basis

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

Transaction concepts

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

yes

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

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

Ephemeral buckets

yes

User concepts

Access control

User and Administrator separation with password-based and LDAP integrated Authentication. Role-base access control.

Based on Windows Authentication

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.