DBMS > Drizzle vs. LevelDB vs. Stardog vs. TerarkDB

System Properties Comparison Drizzle vs. LevelDB vs. Stardog vs. TerarkDB

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Drizzle has published its last release in September 2012. The open-source project is discontinued and Drizzle is excluded from the DB-Engines ranking.

Description

MySQL fork with a pluggable micro-kernel and with an emphasis of performance over compatibility.

Embeddable fast key-value storage library that provides an ordered mapping from string keys to string values

Enterprise Knowledge Graph platform and graph DBMS with high availability, high performance reasoning, and virtualization

A key-value store forked from RocksDB with advanced compression algorithms. It can be used standalone or as a storage engine for MySQL and MongoDB

Primary database model

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

Score	2.35
Rank	#111	Overall
	#19	Key-value stores

Score	2.02
Rank	#123	Overall
	#11	Graph DBMS
	#6	RDF stores

Score	0.00
Rank	#383	Overall
	#60	Key-value stores

Website

github.com/google/leveldb

www.stardog.com

github.com/bytedance/terarkdb

Technical documentation

github.com/google/leveldb/blob/main/doc/index.md

docs.stardog.com

bytedance.larkoffice.com/docs/doccnZmYFqHBm06BbvYgjsHHcKc

Developer

Drizzle project, originally started by Brian Aker

Google

Stardog-Union

ByteDance, originally Terark

Initial release

2008

2011

2010

2016

Current release

7.2.4, September 2012

1.23, February 2021

7.3.0, May 2020

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

GNU GPL

Open Source

BSD

commercial

60-day fully-featured trial license; 1-year fully-featured non-commercial use license for academics/students

commercial

restricted open source version available

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

C++

Server operating systems

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X

Illumos
Linux
OS X
Windows

Linux
macOS
Windows

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

schema-free and OWL/RDFS-schema support

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

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.

Import/export of XML data possible

Secondary indexes

yes

supports real-time indexing in full-text and geospatial

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

with proprietary extensions

Yes, compatible with all major SQL variants through dedicated BI/SQL Server

APIs and other access methods

JDBC

GraphQL query language
HTTP API
Jena RDF API
OWL
RDF4J API
Sesame REST HTTP Protocol
SNARL
SPARQL
Spring Data
Stardog Studio
TinkerPop 3

C++ API
Java API

Supported programming languages

C
C++
Java
PHP

C++
Go
Java

3rd party binding
JavaScript (Node.js)

3rd party binding
Python

3rd party binding

.Net
Clojure
Groovy
Java
JavaScript
Python
Ruby

C++
Java

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions and aggregates, HTTP Server extensions in Java

Triggers

hooks for callbacks inside the server can be used.

yes

via event handlers

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

none

Multi-source replication in HA-Cluster

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Immediate Consistency in HA-Cluster

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

relationships in graphs

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

with automatic compression on writes

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

Pluggable authentication mechanisms

e.g. LDAP, HTTP

Access rights for users and roles

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

DB-Engines blog posts

MySQL won the April ranking; did its forks follow?
1 April 2015, Paul Andlinger

Has MySQL finally lost its mojo?
1 July 2013, Matthias Gelbmann

show all

Recent citations in the news

LevelDB in Ruby — SitePoint
22 October 2014, SitePoint

Microsoft Teams stores auth tokens as cleartext in Windows, Linux, Macs
14 September 2022, BleepingComputer

Pliops unveils XDP-Rocks for RocksDB – Blocks and Files
19 October 2022, Blocks and Files

XanMod, Liquorix Kernels Offer Some Advantages On AMD Ryzen 5 Notebook
26 July 2021, Phoronix

Rust-Based Info Stealers Abuse GitHub Codespaces
19 May 2023, Trend Micro

provided by Google News

Share this page