DBMS > FatDB vs. HEAVY.AI vs. SQLite vs. TerminusDB vs. Yaacomo

System Properties Comparison FatDB vs. HEAVY.AI vs. SQLite vs. TerminusDB vs. Yaacomo

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.

Yaacomo seems to be discontinued and is removed from the DB-Engines ranking

Description

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

A high performance, column-oriented RDBMS, specifically developed to harness the massive parallelism of modern CPU and GPU hardware

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

Scalable Graph Database platform making enterprise data available by exploiting inferred entities and relationships

OpenCL based in-memory RDBMS, designed for efficiently utilizing the hardware via parallel computing

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Graph DBMS

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Spatial DBMS

Document store
RDF store

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

Score	1.64
Rank	#145	Overall
	#67	Relational DBMS

Score	111.41
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Score	0.23
Rank	#316	Overall
	#27	Graph DBMS

Website

github.com/heavyai/heavydb
www.heavy.ai

www.sqlite.org

terminusdb.com

yaacomo.com

Technical documentation

docs.heavy.ai

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

terminusdb.github.io/terminusdb/#

Developer

FatCloud

HEAVY.AI, Inc.

Dwayne Richard Hipp

DataChemist Ltd.

Q2WEB GmbH

Initial release

2012

2016

2000

2018

2009

Current release

5.10, January 2022

3.46.0 (23 May 2024), May 2024

11.0.0, January 2023

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache Version 2; enterprise edition available

Open Source

Public Domain

Open Source

GPL V3

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

C++ and CUDA

Prolog, Rust

Server operating systems

Windows

Linux

server-less

Linux

Android
Linux
Windows

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

dynamic column types

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

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

Via inetgration in SQL Server

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

SQL-like query language (WOQL)

yes

APIs and other access methods

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

JDBC
ODBC
Thrift
Vega

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

OWL
RESTful HTTP API
WOQL (Web Object Query Language)

JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC/Thrift
Python

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

JavaScript
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

via applications

yes

Triggers

yes

via applications

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

Round robin

none

Graph Partitioning

horizontal partitioning

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

selectable replication factor

Multi-source replication

none

Journaling Streams

Source-replica replication

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

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

via file-system locks

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

in-memory journaling

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

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Role-based access control

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

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.