DBMS > Ehcache vs. LevelDB vs. Lovefield vs. SQLite vs. Tkrzw

System Properties Comparison Ehcache vs. LevelDB vs. Lovefield vs. SQLite vs. Tkrzw

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

A widely adopted Java cache with tiered storage options

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

Embeddable relational database for web apps written in pure JavaScript

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

A concept of libraries, allowing an application program to store and query key-value pairs in a file. Successor of Tokyo Cabinet and Kyoto Cabinet

Primary database model

Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Key-value store

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

Score	4.89
Rank	#67	Overall
	#8	Key-value stores

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

Score	0.29
Rank	#293	Overall
	#133	Relational DBMS

Score	114.32
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

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

Website

www.ehcache.org

github.com/google/leveldb

google.github.io/lovefield

www.sqlite.org

dbmx.net/tkrzw

Technical documentation

www.ehcache.org/documentation

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

github.com/google/lovefield/blob/master/docs/spec_index.md

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

Developer

Terracotta Inc, owned by Software AG

Google

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Mikio Hirabayashi

Initial release

2009

2011

2014

2000

2020

Current release

3.10.0, March 2022

1.23, February 2021

2.1.12, February 2017

3.45.3 (15 April 2024), April 2024

0.9.3, August 2020

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache Version 2; commercial licenses available

Open Source

BSD

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

Public Domain

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

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

Java

C++

JavaScript

C++

Server operating systems

All OS with a Java VM

Illumos
Linux
OS X
Windows

server-less, requires a JavaScript environment (browser, Node.js)

tested with Chrome, Firefox, IE, Safari

server-less

Linux
macOS

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

dynamic column types

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

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.

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language

via JavaScript builder pattern

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

APIs and other access methods

JCache

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

Supported programming languages

Java

C++
Go
Java

3rd party binding
JavaScript (Node.js)

3rd party binding
Python

3rd party binding

JavaScript

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

C++
Java
Python
Ruby

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Triggers

yes

Cache Event Listeners

Using read-only observers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

by using Terracotta Server

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

by using Terracotta Server

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Tunable Consistency (Strong, Eventual, Weak)

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

yes

supports JTA and can work as an XA resource

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

via file-system locks

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

using a tiered cache-storage approach

yes

with automatic compression on writes

yes, by using IndexedDB or the cloud service Firebase Realtime Database

yes

In-memory capabilities

Is there an option to define some or all structures to be held in-memory only.

yes

using MemoryDB

yes

using specific database classes

User concepts

Access control

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.