DBMS > Cachelot.io vs. FatDB vs. Google BigQuery vs. JaguarDB

System Properties Comparison Cachelot.io vs. FatDB vs. Google BigQuery vs. JaguarDB

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

FatDB/FatCloud has ceased operations as a company with February 2014. FatDB is discontinued and excluded from the ranking.

Description

In-memory caching system

A .NET NoSQL DBMS that can integrate with and extend SQL Server.

Large scale data warehouse service with append-only tables

Performant, highly scalable DBMS for AI and IoT applications

Primary database model

Key-value store

Document store
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Key-value store
Vector DBMS

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

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

Score	58.10
Rank	#19	Overall
	#13	Relational DBMS

Score	0.06
Rank	#381	Overall
	#59	Key-value stores
	#13	Vector DBMS

Website

cachelot.io

cloud.google.com/bigquery

www.jaguardb.com

Technical documentation

cloud.google.com/bigquery/docs

www.jaguardb.com/support.html

Developer

FatCloud

Google

DataJaguar, Inc.

Initial release

2015

2012

2010

2015

Current release

3.3 July 2023

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Simplified BSD License

commercial

Open Source

GPL V3.0

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++

the server part. Clients available in other languages

Server operating systems

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X

Windows

hosted

Linux

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

Via inetgration in SQL Server

yes

A subset of ANSI SQL is implemented

but no views, foreign keys, triggers

APIs and other access methods

Memcached protocol

.NET Client API
LINQ
RESTful HTTP API
RPC
Windows WCF Bindings

RESTful HTTP/JSON API

JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

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

.Net
Java
JavaScript
Objective-C
PHP
Python
Ruby

C
C++
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scala

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

via applications

user defined functions

in JavaScript

Triggers

yes

via applications

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

none

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

selectable replication factor

Multi-source replication

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

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

Transaction concepts

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

Since BigQuery is designed for querying data

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.

User concepts

Access control

Can implement custom security layer via applications

Access privileges (owner, writer, reader) on dataset, table or view level

Google Cloud Identity & Access Management (IAM)

rights management via user accounts

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.