DBMS > Cachelot.io vs. etcd vs. HarperDB vs. Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB vs. SAP SQL Anywhere

System Properties Comparison Cachelot.io vs. etcd vs. HarperDB vs. Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB vs. SAP SQL Anywhere

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

In-memory caching system

Ultra-low latency distributed database with an intuitive REST API supporting NoSQL and SQL (including joins). Deployment of functions and databases simultaneously with a consolidated node-level architecture.

Globally distributed, horizontally scalable, multi-model database service

RDBMS database and synchronization technologies for server, desktop, remote office, and mobile environments

Primary database model

Key-value store

Document store

Document store
Graph DBMS
Key-value store
Wide column store

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Spatial DBMS

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

Score	0.00
Rank	#383	Overall
	#60	Key-value stores

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

Score	0.55
Rank	#248	Overall
	#38	Document stores

Score	29.04
Rank	#27	Overall
	#4	Document stores
	#2	Graph DBMS
	#3	Key-value stores
	#3	Wide column stores

Score	4.25
Rank	#79	Overall
	#43	Relational DBMS

Website

cachelot.io

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

www.harperdb.io

azure.microsoft.com/services/cosmos-db

www.sap.com/products/technology-platform/sql-anywhere.html

Technical documentation

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

docs.harperdb.io/docs

learn.microsoft.com/azure/cosmos-db

help.sap.com/docs/SAP_SQL_Anywhere

Developer

HarperDB

Microsoft

SAP

formerly Sybase

Initial release

2015

2017

2014

1992

Current release

3.4, August 2019

3.1, August 2021

17, July 2015

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Simplified BSD License

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

commercial

free community edition available

commercial

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++

Node.js

Server operating systems

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X

FreeBSD
Linux
Windows

experimental

Linux
OS X

hosted

AIX
HP-UX
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

Data scheme

schema-free

dynamic schema

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

JSON data types

yes

JSON types

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

Secondary indexes

yes

All properties auto-indexed by default

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like data manipulation statements

SQL-like query language

yes

APIs and other access methods

Memcached protocol

gRPC
JSON over HTTP

JDBC
ODBC
React Hooks
RESTful HTTP/JSON API
WebSocket

DocumentDB API
Graph API (Gremlin)
MongoDB API
RESTful HTTP API
Table API

ADO.NET
HTTP API
JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

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

.Net
C
C++
Clojure
Erlang
Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Perl
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Rust
Scala
Tcl

.Net
C
C#
C++
ColdFusion
D
Dart
Delphi
Erlang
Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Lisp
MatLab
Objective C
Perl
PHP
PowerShell
Prolog
Python
R
Ruby
Rust
Scala
Swift

.Net
C#
Java
JavaScript
JavaScript (Node.js)
MongoDB client drivers written for various programming languages
Python

C
C#
C++
Delphi
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Custom Functions

since release 3.1

JavaScript

yes, in C/C++, Java, .Net or Perl

Triggers

yes, watching key changes

JavaScript

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

A table resides as a whole on one (or more) nodes in a cluster

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

none

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

the nodes on which a table resides can be defined

yes

Implicit feature of the cloud service

Source-replica replication

Database mirroring

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

with Hadoop integration

Integration with Hadoop/HDInsight on Azure*

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

none

Immediate Consistency

Bounded Staleness
Consistent Prefix
Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Consistency level configurable on request level
Session Consistency

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

Atomic execution of specific operations

Multi-item ACID transactions with snapshot isolation within a partition

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

yes, using LMDB

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

Access rights for users and roles

Access rights can be defined down to the item level

fine grained access rights 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.