DBMS > FatDB vs. Heroic vs. Oracle NoSQL vs. SQLite

System Properties Comparison FatDB vs. Heroic vs. Oracle NoSQL 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.

Time Series DBMS built at Spotify based on Cassandra or Google Cloud Bigtable, and ElasticSearch

A multi-model, scalable, distributed NoSQL database, designed to provide highly reliable, flexible, and available data management across a configurable set of storage nodes

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Time Series DBMS

Document store
Key-value store
Relational DBMS

Relational DBMS

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

Score	0.46
Rank	#265	Overall
	#22	Time Series DBMS

Score	3.05
Rank	#97	Overall
	#17	Document stores
	#16	Key-value stores
	#50	Relational DBMS

Score	111.41
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Website

github.com/spotify/heroic

www.oracle.com/database/nosql/technologies/nosql

www.sqlite.org

Technical documentation

spotify.github.io/heroic

docs.oracle.com/en/database/other-databases/nosql-database/index.html

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

Developer

FatCloud

Spotify

Oracle

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Initial release

2012

2014

2011

2000

Current release

24.1, May 2024

3.46.0 (23 May 2024), May 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

Proprietary for Enterprise Edition (Oracle Database EE license has Oracle NoSQL database EE covered: details)

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

Server operating systems

Windows

Linux
Solaris SPARC/x86

server-less

Data scheme

schema-free

Support Fixed schema and Schema-less deployment with the ability to interoperate between them.

yes

dynamic column types

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

optional

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

via Elasticsearch

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

Via inetgration in SQL Server

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

HQL (Heroic Query Language, a JSON-based language)
HTTP API

RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

Supported programming languages

C
C#
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
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

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

via applications

Triggers

yes

via applications

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

selectable replication factor

yes

Electable source-replica replication per shard. Support distributed global deployment with Multi-region table feature

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

with Hadoop integration

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

depending on configuration

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

configurable

ACID within a storage node (=shard)

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

off heap cache

yes

User concepts

Access control

Can implement custom security layer via applications

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.