DBMS > Cachelot.io vs. EsgynDB vs. Lovefield vs. MySQL vs. Prometheus

System Properties Comparison Cachelot.io vs. EsgynDB vs. Lovefield vs. MySQL vs. Prometheus

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

In-memory caching system

Enterprise-class SQL-on-Hadoop solution, powered by Apache Trafodion

Embeddable relational database for web apps written in pure JavaScript

Widely used open source RDBMS

Open-source Time Series DBMS and monitoring system

Primary database model

Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Key/Value like access via memcached API

Time Series DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	0.00
Rank	#385	Overall
	#61	Key-value stores

Score	0.15
Rank	#325	Overall
	#144	Relational DBMS

Score	0.22
Rank	#306	Overall
	#138	Relational DBMS

Score	1029.49
Rank	#2	Overall
	#2	Relational DBMS

Score	7.56
Rank	#49	Overall
	#3	Time Series DBMS

Website

cachelot.io

www.esgyn.cn

google.github.io/lovefield

www.mysql.com

prometheus.io

Technical documentation

github.com/google/lovefield/blob/master/docs/spec_index.md

dev.mysql.com/doc

prometheus.io/docs

Developer

Esgyn

Google

Oracle

since 2010, originally MySQL AB, then Sun

Initial release

2015

2014

1995

2015

Current release

2.1.12, February 2017

9.0.0, July 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Simplified BSD License

commercial

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

GPL version 2. Commercial licenses with extended functionallity are available

Open Source

Apache 2.0

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++, Java

JavaScript

C and C++

Server operating systems

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X

Linux

server-less, requires a JavaScript environment (browser, Node.js)

tested with Chrome, Firefox, IE, Safari

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

Linux
Windows

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

Numeric data only

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

Import of XML data possible

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

SQL-like query language

via JavaScript builder pattern

yes

with proprietary extensions

APIs and other access methods

Memcached protocol

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
Proprietary native API

RESTful HTTP/JSON API

Supported programming languages

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

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC/ADO.Net

JavaScript

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

.Net
C++
Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python
Ruby

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Java Stored Procedures

yes

proprietary syntax

Triggers

Using read-only observers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

none

horizontal partitioning, sharding with MySQL Cluster or MySQL Fabric

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

Multi-source replication between multi datacenters

none

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

yes

by Federation

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

none

Immediate Consistency

none

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

not for MyISAM storage engine

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

not for MyISAM storage engine

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

table locks or row locks depending on storage engine

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

yes, by using IndexedDB or the cloud service Firebase Realtime Database

yes

In-memory capabilities

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

yes

using MemoryDB

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.