DBMS > FatDB vs. Geode vs. Spark SQL vs. SQLite

System Properties Comparison FatDB vs. Geode vs. Spark SQL vs. SQLite

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

FatDB/FatCloud has ceased operations as a company with February 2014. FatDB is discontinued and excluded from the ranking.

Description

A .NET NoSQL DBMS that can integrate with and extend SQL Server.

Geode is a distributed data container, pooling memory, CPU, network resources, and optionally local disk across multiple processes

Spark SQL is a component on top of 'Spark Core' for structured data processing

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Key-value store

Relational DBMS

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

Score	1.92
Rank	#131	Overall
	#23	Key-value stores

Score	18.96
Rank	#33	Overall
	#20	Relational DBMS

Score	114.32
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Website

geode.apache.org

spark.apache.org/sql

www.sqlite.org

Technical documentation

geode.apache.org/docs

spark.apache.org/docs/latest/sql-programming-guide.html

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

Developer

FatCloud

Originally developed by Gemstone. They outsourced the project to Apache in 2015 but still deliver a commercial version as Gemfire.

Apache Software Foundation

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Initial release

2012

2002

2014

2000

Current release

1.1, February 2017

3.5.0 ( 2.13), September 2023

3.45.3 (15 April 2024), April 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache Version 2; commercial licenses available as Gemfire

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

Public Domain

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

Scala

Server operating systems

Windows

All OS with a Java VM

the JDK (8 or later) is also required

Linux
OS X
Windows

server-less

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

dynamic column types

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

Via inetgration in SQL Server

SQL-like query language (OQL)

SQL-like DML and DDL statements

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

APIs and other access methods

.NET Client API
LINQ
RESTful HTTP API
RPC
Windows WCF Bindings

Java Client API
Memcached protocol
RESTful HTTP API

JDBC
ODBC

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

Supported programming languages

.Net
All JVM based languages
C++
Groovy
Java
Scala

Java
Python
R
Scala

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

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

via applications

user defined functions

Triggers

yes

via applications

yes

Cache Event Listeners

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

yes, utilizing Spark Core

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

selectable replication factor

Multi-source replication

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

yes, on a single node

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

via file-system locks

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

Can implement custom security layer via applications

Access rights per client and object definable

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.