DBMS > EJDB vs. HarperDB vs. SQLite vs. Sqrrl

System Properties Comparison EJDB vs. HarperDB vs. SQLite vs. Sqrrl

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

Embeddable document-store database library with JSON representation of queries (in MongoDB style)

Ultra-low latency distributed database with an intuitive REST API supporting NoSQL and SQL (including joins). Deployment of functions and databases simultaneously with a consolidated node-level architecture.

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

Adaptable, secure NoSQL built on Apache Accumulo

Primary database model

Document store

Relational DBMS

Document store
Graph DBMS
Key-value store
Wide column store

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

Score	0.27
Rank	#297	Overall
	#44	Document stores

Score	0.55
Rank	#248	Overall
	#38	Document stores

Score	114.32
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Website

github.com/Softmotions/ejdb

www.harperdb.io

www.sqlite.org

sqrrl.com

Technical documentation

github.com/Softmotions/ejdb/blob/master/README.md

docs.harperdb.io/docs

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

Developer

Softmotions

HarperDB

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Amazon

originally Sqrrl Data, Inc.

Initial release

2012

2017

2000

2012

Current release

3.1, August 2021

3.45.3 (15 April 2024), April 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

GPLv2

commercial

free community edition available

Open Source

Public Domain

commercial

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

Node.js

Java

Server operating systems

server-less

Linux
OS X

server-less

Linux

Data scheme

schema-free

dynamic schema

yes

dynamic column types

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

string, integer, double, bool, date, object_id

yes

JSON data types

yes

not rigid because of 'dynamic typing' concept.

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

SQL-like data manipulation statements

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

APIs and other access methods

in-process shared library

JDBC
ODBC
React Hooks
RESTful HTTP/JSON API
WebSocket

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

Accumulo Shell
Java API
JDBC
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API
Thrift

Supported programming languages

Actionscript
C
C#
C++
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Lua
Objective-C
Pike
Python
Ruby

.Net
C
C#
C++
ColdFusion
D
Dart
Delphi
Erlang
Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Lisp
MatLab
Objective C
Perl
PHP
PowerShell
Prolog
Python
R
Ruby
Rust
Scala
Swift

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

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Custom Functions

since release 3.1

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

A table resides as a whole on one (or more) nodes in a cluster

none

Sharding

making use of Hadoop

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

yes

the nodes on which a table resides can be defined

none

selectable replication factor

making use of Hadoop

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

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

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

typically not needed, however similar functionality with collection joins possible

yes

Transaction concepts

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

Atomic execution of specific operations

ACID

Atomic updates per row, document, or graph entity

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Read/Write Locking

yes

via file-system locks

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

yes, using LMDB

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

Access rights for users and roles

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

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.