DBMS > Dragonfly vs. FatDB vs. Netezza vs. SQLite vs. Yaacomo

System Properties Comparison Dragonfly vs. FatDB vs. Netezza vs. SQLite vs. Yaacomo

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.

Yaacomo seems to be discontinued and 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.

Data warehouse and analytics appliance part of IBM PureSystems

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

OpenCL based in-memory RDBMS, designed for efficiently utilizing the hardware via parallel computing

Primary database model

Key-value store

Document store
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

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

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

Score	9.06
Rank	#46	Overall
	#29	Relational DBMS

Score	114.32
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Website

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

www.ibm.com/products/netezza

www.sqlite.org

yaacomo.com

Technical documentation

www.dragonflydb.io/docs

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

Developer

DragonflyDB team and community contributors

FatCloud

IBM

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Q2WEB GmbH

Initial release

2023

2012

2000

2009

Current release

1.0, March 2023

3.45.3 (15 April 2024), April 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

BSL 1.1

commercial

Open Source

Public Domain

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++

Server operating systems

Linux

Windows

Linux

included in appliance

server-less

Android
Linux
Windows

Data scheme

scheme-free

schema-free

yes

dynamic column types

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

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

yes

not rigid because of 'dynamic typing' concept.

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.

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

Via inetgration in SQL Server

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

yes

APIs and other access methods

Proprietary protocol

RESP - REdis Serialization Protocol

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

JDBC
ODBC
OLE DB

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

JDBC
ODBC

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++
Fortran
Java
Lua
Perl
Python
R

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

Lua

yes

via applications

yes

Triggers

publish/subscribe channels provide some trigger functionality

yes

via applications

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

none

horizontal partitioning

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Source-replica replication

selectable replication factor

Source-replica replication

none

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

via file-system locks

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

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

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.