DBMS > Dragonfly vs. Interbase vs. LeanXcale vs. SQLite

System Properties Comparison Dragonfly vs. Interbase vs. LeanXcale vs. SQLite

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

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

Light-weight proven RDBMS

originally from Borland

A highly scalable full ACID SQL database with fast NoSQL data ingestion and GIS capabilities

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

Primary database model

Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Key-value store
Relational DBMS

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	4.61
Rank	#72	Overall
	#39	Relational DBMS

Score	0.29
Rank	#291	Overall
	#41	Key-value stores
	#132	Relational DBMS

Score	114.32
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Website

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

www.embarcadero.com/products/interbase

www.leanxcale.com

www.sqlite.org

Technical documentation

www.dragonflydb.io/docs

docs.embarcadero.com/products/interbase

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

Developer

DragonflyDB team and community contributors

Embarcadero

LeanXcale

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Initial release

2023

1984

2015

2000

Current release

1.0, March 2023

InterBase 2020, December 2019

3.45.3 (15 April 2024), April 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

BSL 1.1

commercial

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

C++

Server operating systems

Linux

Android
iOS
Linux
OS X
Windows

server-less

Data scheme

scheme-free

yes

dynamic column types

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.

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.

export as XML data possible

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

through Apache Derby

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

APIs and other access methods

Proprietary protocol

RESP - REdis Serialization Protocol

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

JDBC
Kafka Connector
ODBC
proprietary key/value interface
Spark Connector

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
C++
Delphi
Java
Object Pascal
PHP
Ruby

C
Java
Scala

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

Interbase procedure and trigger language

Triggers

publish/subscribe channels provide some trigger functionality

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Source-replica replication

Interbase Change Views

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

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

Multiversion concurreny control

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

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.