DBMS > DuckDB vs. JaguarDB vs. RocksDB vs. Yanza

System Properties Comparison DuckDB vs. JaguarDB vs. RocksDB vs. Yanza

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Yanza seems to be discontinued. Therefore it is excluded from the DB-Engines Ranking.

Description

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

Performant, highly scalable DBMS for AI and IoT applications

Embeddable persistent key-value store optimized for fast storage (flash and RAM)

Time Series DBMS for IoT Applications

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Key-value store
Vector DBMS

Key-value store

Time Series DBMS

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

Score	4.57
Rank	#74	Overall
	#40	Relational DBMS

Score	0.00
Rank	#383	Overall
	#60	Key-value stores
	#13	Vector DBMS

Score	3.65
Rank	#85	Overall
	#11	Key-value stores

Website

duckdb.org

www.jaguardb.com

rocksdb.org

yanza.com

Technical documentation

duckdb.org/docs

www.jaguardb.com/support.html

github.com/facebook/rocksdb/wiki

Developer

DataJaguar, Inc.

Facebook, Inc.

Yanza

Initial release

2018

2015

2013

2015

Current release

0.10, February 2024

3.3 July 2023

9.2.1, May 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

MIT License

Open Source

GPL V3.0

Open Source

BSD

commercial

free version available

Cloud-based only

Only available as a cloud service

but mainly used as a service provided by Yanza

DBaaS offerings (sponsored links)

Database as a Service

Providers of DBaaS offerings, please contact us to be listed.

Implementation language

C++

the server part. Clients available in other languages

C++

Server operating systems

server-less

Linux

Windows

Data scheme

yes

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.

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

A subset of ANSI SQL is implemented

but no views, foreign keys, triggers

APIs and other access methods

Arrow Database Connectivity (ADBC)
CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

JDBC
ODBC

C++ API
Java API

HTTP API

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
C++
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scala

C
C++
Go
Java
Perl
Python
Ruby

any language that supports HTTP calls

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Triggers

yes

Timer and event based

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

horizontal partitioning

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

Multi-source replication

yes

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

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

yes

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes, multi-version concurrency control (MVCC)

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

rights management via user accounts

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.