DBMS > Dragonfly vs. GeoSpock vs. Sequoiadb vs. SQLite

System Properties Comparison Dragonfly vs. GeoSpock vs. Sequoiadb vs. SQLite

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

GeoSpock seems to be discontinued. Therefore it will be excluded 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

Spatial and temporal data processing engine for extreme data scale

NewSQL database with distributed OLTP and SQL

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

Primary database model

Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Document store
Relational DBMS

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Time Series DBMS

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

Score	0.44
Rank	#255	Overall
	#38	Key-value stores

Score	0.42
Rank	#263	Overall
	#41	Document stores
	#121	Relational DBMS

Score	103.35
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Website

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

geospock.com

www.sequoiadb.com

www.sqlite.org

Technical documentation

www.dragonflydb.io/docs

www.sequoiadb.com/en/index.php?m=Files&a=index

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

Developer

DragonflyDB team and community contributors

GeoSpock

Sequoiadb Ltd.

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Initial release

2023

2013

2000

Current release

1.0, March 2023

2.0, September 2019

3.46.1 (13 August 2024), August 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

BSL 1.1

commercial

Open Source

Server: AGPL; Client: Apache V2

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

C++

Java, Javascript

C++

Server operating systems

Linux

hosted

Linux

server-less

Data scheme

scheme-free

yes

schema-free

yes

dynamic column types

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

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

yes

oid, date, timestamp, binary, regex

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

temporal, categorical

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

ANSI SQL for query only (using Presto)

SQL-like query language

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

APIs and other access methods

Proprietary protocol

RESP - REdis Serialization Protocol

JDBC

proprietary protocol using JSON

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

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

.Net
C++
Java
PHP
Python

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

JavaScript

Triggers

publish/subscribe channels provide some trigger functionality

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Automatic sharding

Sharding

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Source-replica replication

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Eventual Consistency

Immediate Consistency

Eventual 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

Document is locked during a transaction

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes, strict serializability by the server

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

Password-based authentication

Access rights for users can be defined per table

simple password-based access control

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.