DBMS > Brytlyt vs. Cachelot.io vs. Snowflake vs. ToroDB vs. VoltDB

System Properties Comparison Brytlyt vs. Cachelot.io vs. Snowflake vs. ToroDB vs. VoltDB

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

ToroDB seems to be discontinued. Therefore it is excluded from the DB-Engines Ranking.

Description

Scalable GPU-accelerated RDBMS for very fast analytic and streaming workloads, leveraging PostgreSQL

In-memory caching system

Cloud-based data warehousing service for structured and semi-structured data

A MongoDB-compatible JSON document store, built on top of PostgreSQL

Distributed In-Memory NewSQL RDBMS

Used for OLTP applications with a high frequency of relatively simple transactions, that can hold all their data in memory

Primary database model

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

Score	0.38
Rank	#276	Overall
	#127	Relational DBMS

Score	0.04
Rank	#388	Overall
	#62	Key-value stores

Score	130.36
Rank	#8	Overall
	#5	Relational DBMS

Score	1.47
Rank	#157	Overall
	#73	Relational DBMS

Website

brytlyt.io

cachelot.io

www.snowflake.com

github.com/torodb/server

www.voltdb.com

Technical documentation

docs.brytlyt.io

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

docs.voltdb.com

Developer

Brytlyt

Snowflake Computing Inc.

8Kdata

VoltDB Inc.

Initial release

2016

2015

2014

2016

2010

Current release

5.0, August 2023

11.3, April 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Simplified BSD License

commercial

Open Source

AGPL-V3

Open Source

AGPL for Community Edition, commercial license for Enterprise, AWS, and Pro Editions

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, C++ and CUDA

C++

Java

Java, C++

Server operating systems

Linux
OS X
Windows

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X

hosted

All OS with a Java 7 VM

Linux
OS X

for development

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

yes

support of semi-structured data formats (JSON, XML, Avro)

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

string, integer, double, boolean, date, object_id

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.

yes

specific XML-type available, but no XML query functionality.

yes

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

only a subset of SQL 99

APIs and other access methods

ADO.NET
JDBC
native C library
ODBC
streaming API for large objects

Memcached protocol

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

Java API
JDBC
RESTful HTTP/JSON API

Supported programming languages

.Net
C
C++
Delphi
Java
Perl
Python
Tcl

.Net
C
C++
ColdFusion
Erlang
Java
Lisp
Lua
OCaml
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

C#
C++
Erlang

not officially supported
Go
Java
JavaScript

Node.js
PHP
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in PL/pgSQL

user defined functions

Java

Triggers

yes

similar concept for controling cloud resources

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

yes

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Source-replica replication

none

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

Immediate Consistency

none

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

FOREIGN KEY constraints are not supported

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Transactions are executed single-threaded within stored procedures

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Data access is serialized by the server

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

Snapshots and command logging

In-memory capabilities

Is there an option to define some or all structures to be held in-memory only.

User concepts

Access control

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Users with fine-grained authorization concept, user roles and pluggable authentication

Access rights for users and roles

Users and roles with access to stored procedures

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.