DBMS > CockroachDB vs. EDB Postgres vs. FatDB vs. SQLite

System Properties Comparison CockroachDB vs. EDB Postgres vs. FatDB vs. SQLite

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

CockroachDB is a distributed database architected for modern cloud applications. It is wire compatible with PostgreSQL and backed by a Key-Value Store, which is either RocksDB or a purpose-built derivative, called Pebble.

The EDB Postgres Platform is an enterprise-class data management platform based on the open source database PostgreSQL with flexible deployment options and Oracle compatibility features, complemented by tool kits for management, integration, and migration.

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

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Document store
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	6.10
Rank	#58	Overall
	#33	Relational DBMS

Score	2.18
Rank	#122	Overall
	#59	Relational DBMS

Score	116.01
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Website

www.cockroachlabs.com

www.enterprisedb.com

www.sqlite.org

Technical documentation

www.cockroachlabs.com/docs

www.enterprisedb.com/docs

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

Developer

Cockroach Labs

EnterpriseDB

FatCloud

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Initial release

2015

2005

2012

2000

Current release

23.1.1, May 2023

14, December 2021

3.45.3 (15 April 2024), April 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache 2.0, commercial license available

commercial

BSD for PostgreSQL-components

commercial

Open Source

Public Domain

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

Server operating systems

Linux
macOS
Windows

Linux
Windows

Windows

server-less

Data scheme

dynamic schema

yes

schema-free

yes

dynamic column types

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

not rigid because of 'dynamic typing' concept.

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.

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes, wire compatible with PostgreSQL

yes

standard with numerous extensions

Via inetgration in SQL Server

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

APIs and other access methods

JDBC

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

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

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

Supported programming languages

C#
C++
Clojure
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
Ruby
Rust

.Net
C
C++
Delphi
Java
Perl
PHP
Python
Tcl

Actionscript
Ada
Basic
C
C#
C++
D
Delphi
Forth
Fortran
Haskell
Java
JavaScript
Lisp
Lua
MatLab
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
PL/SQL
Python
R
Ruby
Scala
Scheme
Smalltalk
Tcl

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

realized in proprietary language PL/pgSQL or with common languages like Perl, Python, Tcl etc.

yes

via applications

Triggers

yes

via applications

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

horizontal partitioning (by key range)

all tables are translated to an ordered KV store and then broken down into 64MB ranges, which are then used as replicas in RAFT

horizontal partitioning

by hash, list or range

Sharding

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication using RAFT

Multi-source replication

selectable replication factor

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

yes, multi-version concurrency control (MVCC)

yes

via file-system locks

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

Role-based access control

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Can implement custom security layer via applications

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.