DBMS > Derby vs. Lovefield vs. PlanetScale vs. SQLite

System Properties Comparison Derby vs. Lovefield vs. PlanetScale vs. SQLite

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Full-featured RDBMS with a small footprint, either embedded into a Java application or used as a database server.

Embeddable relational database for web apps written in pure JavaScript

Scalable, distributed, serverless MySQL database platform built on top of Vitess

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	4.60
Rank	#70	Overall
	#38	Relational DBMS

Score	0.33
Rank	#286	Overall
	#131	Relational DBMS

Score	1.49
Rank	#155	Overall
	#72	Relational DBMS

Score	111.41
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Website

db.apache.org/derby

google.github.io/lovefield

planetscale.com

www.sqlite.org

Technical documentation

db.apache.org/derby/manuals/index.html

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

planetscale.com/docs

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

Developer

Apache Software Foundation

Google

PlanetScale

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Initial release

1997

2014

2020

2000

Current release

10.17.1.0, November 2023

2.1.12, February 2017

3.46.0 (23 May 2024), May 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache version 2

Open Source

Apache 2.0

commercial

Open Source

Public Domain

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

Java

JavaScript

Server operating systems

All OS with a Java VM

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

tested with Chrome, Firefox, IE, Safari

Docker
Linux
macOS

server-less

Data scheme

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

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

SQL-like query language

via JavaScript builder pattern

yes

with proprietary extensions

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

APIs and other access methods

JDBC

ADO.NET
JDBC
MySQL protocol
ODBC

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

Supported programming languages

Java

JavaScript

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

Java Stored Procedures

yes

proprietary syntax

Triggers

yes

Using read-only observers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Source-replica replication

none

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

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 across shards
Immediate Consistency within a shard

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

not for MyISAM storage engine

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

ACID at shard level

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

table locks or row locks depending on storage engine

yes

via file-system locks

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.