DBMS > EJDB vs. Memcached vs. TerarkDB vs. Vitess

System Properties Comparison EJDB vs. Memcached vs. TerarkDB vs. Vitess

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

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

In-memory key-value store, originally intended for caching

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

Scalable, distributed, cloud-native DBMS, extending MySQL

Primary database model

Document store

Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	0.31
Rank	#296	Overall
	#44	Document stores

Score	18.08
Rank	#32	Overall
	#4	Key-value stores

Score	0.08
Rank	#367	Overall
	#56	Key-value stores

Score	0.88
Rank	#203	Overall
	#95	Relational DBMS

Website

github.com/Softmotions/ejdb

www.memcached.org

github.com/bytedance/terarkdb

vitess.io

Technical documentation

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

github.com/memcached/memcached/wiki

bytedance.larkoffice.com/docs/doccnZmYFqHBm06BbvYgjsHHcKc

vitess.io/docs

Developer

Softmotions

Danga Interactive

originally developed by Brad Fitzpatrick for LiveJournal

ByteDance, originally Terark

The Linux Foundation, PlanetScale

Initial release

2012

2003

2016

2013

Current release

1.6.27, May 2024

15.0.2, December 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

GPLv2

Open Source

BSD license

commercial

restricted open source version available

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0, commercial licenses 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++

Server operating systems

server-less

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X
Unix
Windows

Docker
Linux
macOS

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

string, integer, double, bool, date, object_id

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

with proprietary extensions

APIs and other access methods

in-process shared library

Proprietary protocol

C++ API
Java API

ADO.NET
JDBC
MySQL protocol
ODBC

Supported programming languages

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

.Net
C
C++
ColdFusion
Erlang
Java
Lisp
Lua
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby

C++
Java

Ada
C
C#
C++
D
Delphi
Eiffel
Erlang
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scheme
Tcl

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

proprietary syntax

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

Repcached, a Memcached patch, provides this functionallity

none

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Eventual Consistency across shards
Immediate Consistency within a shard

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

typically not needed, however similar functionality with collection joins possible

yes

not for MyISAM storage engine

Transaction concepts

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

ACID at shard level

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Read/Write Locking

yes

table locks or row locks depending on storage engine

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

yes

using SASL (Simple Authentication and Security Layer) protocol

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

no user groups or 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

Redis extends the lead in the DB-Engines key-value store ranking
3 February 2014, Matthias Gelbmann

New DB-Engines Ranking shows the popularity of database management systems
3 October 2012, Matthias Gelbmann, Paul Andlinger

show all

Recent citations in the news

Why DDoS Threat Actors Are Shifting Their Tactics
15 March 2024, Infosecurity Magazine

Intel Continues To Demonstrate The Importance Of Software Optimizations: Clear Linux + Xeon Max Benchmarks
23 October 2023, Phoronix

Why Redis beats Memcached for caching
14 September 2017, InfoWorld

What are memcached servers, and why are they being used to launch record-setting DDoS attacks?
6 March 2018, GeekWire

Memcached DDoS: The biggest, baddest denial of service attacker yet
1 March 2018, ZDNet

provided by Google News

PlanetScale Unveils Distributed MySQL Database Service Based on Vitess
18 May 2021, Datanami

PlanetScale grabs YouTube-developed open-source tech, promises Vitess DBaaS with on-the-fly schema changes
18 May 2021, The Register

They scaled YouTube -- now they’ll shard everyone with PlanetScale
13 December 2018, TechCrunch

With Vitess 4.0, database vendor matures cloud-native platform
13 November 2019, TechTarget

Massively Scaling MySQL Using Vitess
19 February 2019, InfoQ.com

provided by Google News

Share this page