DBMS > DuckDB vs. Hyprcubd vs. LevelDB vs. OrigoDB vs. SQLite

System Properties Comparison DuckDB vs. Hyprcubd vs. LevelDB vs. OrigoDB vs. SQLite

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Hyprcubd seems to be discontinued. Therefore it is excluded from the DB-Engines ranking.

Description

An embeddable, in-process, column-oriented SQL OLAP RDBMS

Serverless Time Series DBMS

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

A fully ACID in-memory object graph database

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Time Series DBMS

Key-value store

Document store
Object oriented DBMS

Relational DBMS

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

Score	4.63
Rank	#69	Overall
	#37	Relational DBMS

Score	2.25
Rank	#115	Overall
	#19	Key-value stores

Score	0.06
Rank	#380	Overall
	#50	Document stores
	#18	Object oriented DBMS

Score	111.41
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Website

duckdb.org

hyprcubd.com (offline)

github.com/google/leveldb

origodb.com

www.sqlite.org

Technical documentation

duckdb.org/docs

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

origodb.com/docs

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

Developer

Hyprcubd, Inc.

Google

Robert Friberg et al

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Initial release

2018

2011

2009

under the name LiveDB

2000

Current release

1.0.0, June 2024

1.23, February 2021

3.46.0 (23 May 2024), May 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

MIT License

commercial

Open Source

BSD

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++

Server operating systems

server-less

hosted

Illumos
Linux
OS X
Windows

Linux
Windows

server-less

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

yes

dynamic column types

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

time, int, uint, float, string

User defined using .NET types and collections

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.

can be achieved using .NET

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

SQL-like query language

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

APIs and other access methods

Arrow Database Connectivity (ADBC)
CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

gRPC (https)

.NET Client API
HTTP API
LINQ

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

Supported programming languages

C
C#

3rd party driver
C++
Crystal

3rd party driver
Go

3rd party driver
Java
Lisp

3rd party driver
Python
R
Ruby

3rd party driver
Rust
Swift
Zig

3rd party driver

C++
Go
Java

3rd party binding
JavaScript (Node.js)

3rd party binding
Python

3rd party binding

.Net

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

yes

Triggers

yes

Domain Events

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

horizontal partitioning

client side managed; servers are not synchronized

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

Source-replica replication

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

depending on model

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes, multi-version concurrency control (MVCC)

yes

via file-system locks

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

with automatic compression on writes

yes

Write ahead log

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

token access

Role based authorization

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.