DBMS > Dragonfly vs. FatDB vs. InterSystems Caché vs. Linter

System Properties Comparison Dragonfly vs. FatDB vs. InterSystems Caché vs. Linter

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.

Caché is a deprecated database engine which is substituted with InterSystems IRIS. It therefore is removed from the DB-Engines Ranking.

Description

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

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

A multi-model DBMS and application server

RDBMS for high security requirements

Primary database model

Key-value store

Document store
Key-value store

Key-value store
Object oriented DBMS
Relational DBMS

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store

Spatial DBMS

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

Score	0.49
Rank	#261	Overall
	#38	Key-value stores

Score	0.12
Rank	#350	Overall
	#152	Relational DBMS

Website

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

www.intersystems.com/products/cache

linter.ru

Technical documentation

www.dragonflydb.io/docs

docs.intersystems.com

Developer

DragonflyDB team and community contributors

FatCloud

InterSystems

relex.ru

Initial release

2023

2012

1997

1990

Current release

1.0, March 2023

2018.1.4, May 2020

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

BSL 1.1

commercial

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

C++

C and C++

Server operating systems

Linux

Windows

AIX
HP Open VMS
HP-UX
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

AIX
Android
BSD
HP Open VMS
iOS
Linux
OS X
VxWorks
Windows

Data scheme

scheme-free

schema-free

depending on used data model

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

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

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

SQL

Support of SQL

Via inetgration in SQL Server

yes

APIs and other access methods

Proprietary protocol

RESP - REdis Serialization Protocol

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

.NET Client API
JDBC
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET
JDBC
LINQ
ODBC
OLE DB
Oracle Call Interface (OCI)

Supported programming languages

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++
Java

C
C#
C++
Java
Perl
PHP
Python
Qt
Ruby
Tcl

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Lua

yes

via applications

yes

proprietary syntax with the possibility to convert from PL/SQL

Triggers

publish/subscribe channels provide some trigger functionality

yes

via applications

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Source-replica replication

selectable replication factor

Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Eventual Consistency

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

Atomic execution of command blocks and scripts

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes, strict serializability by the server

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.

yes

User concepts

Access control

Password-based authentication

Can implement custom security layer via applications

Access rights for users, groups and roles

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.

Related products and services

We invite representatives of vendors of related products to contact us for presenting information about their offerings here.

More resources

Recent citations in the news

DragonflyDB Announces $21m in New Funding and General Availability
21 March 2023, Business Wire

DragonflyDB reels in $21M for its speedy in-memory database
21 March 2023, SiliconANGLE News

DragonflyDB Raises $21M in Funding
21 March 2023, FinSMEs

Dragonfly 1.0 Released For What Claims To Be The World's Fastest In-Memory Data Store
20 March 2023, Phoronix

Intel Linux Kernel Optimizations Show Huge Benefit For High Core Count Servers
29 March 2023, Phoronix

provided by Google News

Defense Health Agency Awards Four Points Technology $39 Million for Intersystems Software Licenses and Maintenance
21 September 2023, ClearanceJobs

AWS, GCP, Oracle, Azure, SAP Lead Cloud DBMS Market: Gartner
12 February 2022, CRN

Announcing IBM Spectrum Sentinel: Building a Cyber Resilient Future
24 June 2022, IBM

Associative Data Modeling Demystified - Part1 - DataScienceCentral.com
9 July 2016, Data Science Central

Choosing a Database Technology. A roadmap and process overview | by Shirish Joshi
23 February 2020, Towards Data Science

provided by Google News

Share this page