DBMS > BoltDB vs. etcd vs. RocksDB vs. Transbase vs. Vitess

System Properties Comparison BoltDB vs. etcd vs. RocksDB vs. Transbase vs. Vitess

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

An embedded key-value store for Go.

A distributed reliable key-value store

Embeddable persistent key-value store optimized for fast storage (flash and RAM)

A resource-optimized, high-performance, universally applicable RDBMS

Scalable, distributed, cloud-native DBMS, extending MySQL

Primary database model

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	0.74
Rank	#220	Overall
	#31	Key-value stores

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

Score	3.65
Rank	#85	Overall
	#11	Key-value stores

Score	0.11
Rank	#341	Overall
	#150	Relational DBMS

Score	0.82
Rank	#209	Overall
	#97	Relational DBMS

Website

github.com/boltdb/bolt

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

rocksdb.org

www.transaction.de/en/products/transbase.html

vitess.io

Technical documentation

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

github.com/facebook/rocksdb/wiki

www.transaction.de/en/products/transbase/features.html

vitess.io/docs

Developer

Facebook, Inc.

Transaction Software GmbH

The Linux Foundation, PlanetScale

Initial release

2013

1987

2013

Current release

3.4, August 2019

8.11.4, April 2024

Transbase 8.3, 2022

15.0.2, December 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

MIT License

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

Open Source

BSD

commercial

free development license

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0, commercial licenses available

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 C++

Server operating systems

BSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

FreeBSD
Linux
Windows

experimental

Linux

FreeBSD
Linux
macOS
Solaris
Windows

Docker
Linux
macOS

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

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

with proprietary extensions

APIs and other access methods

gRPC
JSON over HTTP

C++ API
Java API

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
Proprietary native API

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

C
C++
Go
Java
Perl
Python
Ruby

C
C#
C++
Java
JavaScript
Kotlin
Objective-C
PHP
Python

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

yes

proprietary syntax

Triggers

yes, watching key changes

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

horizontal partitioning

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.

yes

Source-replica replication

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

none

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency across shards
Immediate Consistency within a shard

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

not for MyISAM storage engine

Transaction concepts

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

yes

ACID at shard level

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

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

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

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.