DBMS > Dragonfly vs. SQLite vs. Sqrrl vs. TimescaleDB

System Properties Comparison Dragonfly vs. SQLite vs. Sqrrl vs. TimescaleDB

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Sqrrl has been acquired by Amazon and became a part of Amazon Web Services. It has been 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

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

Adaptable, secure NoSQL built on Apache Accumulo

A time series DBMS optimized for fast ingest and complex queries, based on PostgreSQL

Primary database model

Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Document store
Graph DBMS
Key-value store
Wide column store

Time Series DBMS

Secondary database models

Relational DBMS

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

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

Score	111.41
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Score	4.46
Rank	#71	Overall
	#5	Time Series DBMS

Website

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

www.sqlite.org

sqrrl.com

www.timescale.com

Technical documentation

www.dragonflydb.io/docs

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

docs.timescale.com

Developer

DragonflyDB team and community contributors

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Amazon

originally Sqrrl Data, Inc.

Timescale

Initial release

2023

2000

2012

2017

Current release

1.0, March 2023

3.46.0 (23 May 2024), May 2024

2.15.0, May 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

BSL 1.1

Open Source

Public Domain

commercial

Open Source

Apache 2.0

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++

Java

Server operating systems

Linux

server-less

Linux

Linux
OS X
Windows

Data scheme

scheme-free

yes

dynamic column types

schema-free

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

numerics, strings, booleans, arrays, JSON blobs, geospatial dimensions, currencies, binary data, other complex data types

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-92 is not fully supported

yes

full PostgreSQL SQL syntax

APIs and other access methods

Proprietary protocol

RESP - REdis Serialization Protocol

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

Accumulo Shell
Java API
JDBC
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API
Thrift

ADO.NET
JDBC
native C library
ODBC
streaming API for large objects

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

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

Actionscript
C

using GLib
C#
C++
Cocoa
Delphi
Erlang
Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby
Smalltalk

.Net
C
C++
Delphi
Java

JDBC
JavaScript
Perl
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Scheme
Tcl

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Lua

user defined functions, PL/pgSQL, PL/Tcl, PL/Perl, PL/Python, PL/Java, PL/PHP, PL/R, PL/Ruby, PL/Scheme, PL/Unix shell

Triggers

publish/subscribe channels provide some trigger functionality

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

making use of Hadoop

yes, across time and space (hash partitioning) attributes

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Source-replica replication

none

selectable replication factor

making use of Hadoop

Source-replica replication with hot standby and reads on replicas

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Eventual Consistency

Immediate Consistency

Document store kept consistent with combination of global timestamping, row-level transactions, and server-side consistency resolution.

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

Atomic updates per row, document, or graph entity

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

Cell-level Security, Data-Centric Security, Role-Based Access Control (RBAC), Attribute-Based Access Control (ABAC)

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.