DBMS > EsgynDB vs. Hyprcubd vs. Lovefield vs. MySQL vs. Tigris

System Properties Comparison EsgynDB vs. Hyprcubd vs. Lovefield vs. MySQL vs. Tigris

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

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

Description

Enterprise-class SQL-on-Hadoop solution, powered by Apache Trafodion

Serverless Time Series DBMS

Embeddable relational database for web apps written in pure JavaScript

Widely used open source RDBMS

A horizontally scalable, ACID transactional, document database available both as a fully managed cloud service and for deployment on self-managed infrastructure

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Time Series DBMS

Relational DBMS

Key/Value like access via memcached API

Document store
Key-value store
Search engine
Time Series DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	0.15
Rank	#325	Overall
	#144	Relational DBMS

Score	0.22
Rank	#306	Overall
	#138	Relational DBMS

Score	1029.49
Rank	#2	Overall
	#2	Relational DBMS

Score	0.05
Rank	#359	Overall
	#50	Document stores
	#52	Key-value stores
	#23	Search engines
	#37	Time Series DBMS

Website

www.esgyn.cn

hyprcubd.com (offline)

google.github.io/lovefield

www.mysql.com

www.tigrisdata.com

Technical documentation

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

dev.mysql.com/doc

www.tigrisdata.com/docs

Developer

Esgyn

Hyprcubd, Inc.

Google

Oracle

since 2010, originally MySQL AB, then Sun

Tigris Data, Inc.

Initial release

2015

2014

1995

2022

Current release

2.1.12, February 2017

9.0.0, July 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

GPL version 2. Commercial licenses with extended functionallity are available

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

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++, Java

JavaScript

C and C++

Server operating systems

Linux

hosted

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

tested with Chrome, Firefox, IE, Safari

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

Linux
macOS
Windows

Data scheme

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

time, int, uint, float, string

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.

yes

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

SQL-like query language

via JavaScript builder pattern

yes

with proprietary extensions

APIs and other access methods

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

gRPC (https)

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
Proprietary native API

CLI Client
gRPC
RESTful HTTP API

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC/ADO.Net

JavaScript

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

Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Java Stored Procedures

yes

proprietary syntax

Triggers

Using read-only observers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

none

horizontal partitioning, sharding with MySQL Cluster or MySQL Fabric

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication between multi datacenters

none

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

yes

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

not for MyISAM storage engine

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

not for MyISAM storage engine

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

table locks or row locks depending on storage engine

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

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

yes

yes, using FoundationDB

In-memory capabilities

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

yes

using MemoryDB

yes

User concepts

Access control

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

token access

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

no user groups or roles

Access rights for users and 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.