DBMS > Datomic vs. Dragonfly vs. RocksDB vs. SQLite

System Properties Comparison Datomic vs. Dragonfly vs. RocksDB vs. SQLite

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Datomic builds on immutable values, supports point-in-time queries and uses 3rd party systems for durability

A drop-in Redis replacement that scales vertically to support millions of operations per second and terabyte sized workloads, all on a single instance

Embeddable persistent key-value store optimized for fast storage (flash and RAM)

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Key-value store

Relational DBMS

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

Score	1.59
Rank	#150	Overall
	#69	Relational DBMS

Score	0.41
Rank	#266	Overall
	#38	Key-value stores

Score	3.65
Rank	#85	Overall
	#11	Key-value stores

Score	114.32
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Website

www.datomic.com

github.com/dragonflydb/dragonfly
www.dragonflydb.io

rocksdb.org

www.sqlite.org

Technical documentation

docs.datomic.com

www.dragonflydb.io/docs

github.com/facebook/rocksdb/wiki

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

Developer

Cognitect

DragonflyDB team and community contributors

Facebook, Inc.

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Initial release

2012

2023

2013

2000

Current release

1.0.6735, June 2023

1.0, March 2023

8.11.4, April 2024

3.45.3 (15 April 2024), April 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

limited edition free

Open Source

BSL 1.1

Open Source

BSD

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

Java, Clojure

C++

Server operating systems

All OS with a Java VM

Linux

server-less

Data scheme

yes

scheme-free

schema-free

yes

dynamic column types

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

strings, hashes, lists, sets, sorted sets, bit arrays

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.

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

APIs and other access methods

RESTful HTTP API

Proprietary protocol

RESP - REdis Serialization Protocol

C++ API
Java API

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

Supported programming languages

Clojure
Java

C
C#
C++
Clojure
D
Dart
Elixir
Erlang
Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Lisp
Lua
Objective-C
Perl
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Rust
Scala
Swift
Tcl

C
C++
Go
Java
Perl
Python
Ruby

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

yes

Transaction Functions

Lua

Triggers

By using transaction functions

publish/subscribe channels provide some trigger functionality

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

But extensive use of caching in the application peers

horizontal partitioning

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

But extensive use of caching in the application peers

Source-replica replication

yes

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Atomic execution of command blocks and scripts

yes

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

yes, strict serializability by the server

yes

via file-system locks

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

using external storage systems (e.g. Cassandra, DynamoDB, PostgreSQL, Couchbase and others)

yes

In-memory capabilities

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

yes

recommended only for testing and development

yes

User concepts

Access control

Password-based authentication

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.