DBMS > BoltDB vs. Drizzle vs. HEAVY.AI vs. Splice Machine vs. SQLite

System Properties Comparison BoltDB vs. Drizzle vs. HEAVY.AI vs. Splice Machine vs. SQLite

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Drizzle has published its last release in September 2012. The open-source project is discontinued and Drizzle is excluded from the DB-Engines ranking.

Description

An embedded key-value store for Go.

MySQL fork with a pluggable micro-kernel and with an emphasis of performance over compatibility.

A high performance, column-oriented RDBMS, specifically developed to harness the massive parallelism of modern CPU and GPU hardware

Open-Source SQL RDBMS for Operational and Analytical use cases with native Machine Learning, powered by Hadoop and Spark

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

Primary database model

Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Spatial DBMS

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

Score	0.76
Rank	#224	Overall
	#32	Key-value stores

Score	2.10
Rank	#126	Overall
	#61	Relational DBMS

Score	0.54
Rank	#255	Overall
	#116	Relational DBMS

Score	116.01
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Website

github.com/boltdb/bolt

github.com/heavyai/heavydb
www.heavy.ai

splicemachine.com

www.sqlite.org

Technical documentation

docs.heavy.ai

splicemachine.com/how-it-works

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

Developer

Drizzle project, originally started by Brian Aker

HEAVY.AI, Inc.

Splice Machine

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Initial release

2013

2008

2016

2014

2000

Current release

7.2.4, September 2012

5.10, January 2022

3.1, March 2021

3.45.2 (12 March 2024), March 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

MIT License

Open Source

GNU GPL

Open Source

Apache Version 2; enterprise edition available

Open Source

AGPL 3.0, commercial license available

Open Source

Public Domain

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++ and CUDA

Java

Server operating systems

BSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X

Linux

Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

server-less

Data scheme

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

yes

with proprietary extensions

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

APIs and other access methods

JDBC

JDBC
ODBC
Thrift
Vega

JDBC
Native Spark Datasource
ODBC

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

Supported programming languages

C
C++
Java
PHP

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC/Thrift
Python

C#
C++
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python
R
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

yes

Java

Triggers

hooks for callbacks inside the server can be used.

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

Round robin

Shared Nothhing Auto-Sharding, Columnar Partitioning

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

Multi-source replication

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Yes, via Full Spark Integration

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

none

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

yes

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

yes, multi-version concurrency control (MVCC)

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

Pluggable authentication mechanisms

e.g. LDAP, HTTP

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Access rights for users, groups and roles 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.