DBMS > FatDB vs. Hypertable vs. Memcached vs. RocksDB

System Properties Comparison FatDB vs. Hypertable vs. Memcached vs. RocksDB

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.

Hypertable has stopped its further development with March 2016 and is removed from the DB-Engines ranking.

Description

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

An open source BigTable implementation based on distributed file systems such as Hadoop

In-memory key-value store, originally intended for caching

Embeddable persistent key-value store optimized for fast storage (flash and RAM)

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Wide column store

Key-value store

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

Score	18.08
Rank	#32	Overall
	#4	Key-value stores

Score	3.41
Rank	#86	Overall
	#11	Key-value stores

Website

www.memcached.org

rocksdb.org

Technical documentation

github.com/memcached/memcached/wiki

github.com/facebook/rocksdb/wiki

Developer

FatCloud

Hypertable Inc.

Danga Interactive

originally developed by Brad Fitzpatrick for LiveJournal

Facebook, Inc.

Initial release

2012

2009

2003

2013

Current release

0.9.8.11, March 2016

1.6.27, May 2024

9.2.1, May 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

GNU version 3. Commercial license available

Open Source

BSD license

Open Source

BSD

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++

Server operating systems

Windows

Linux
OS X
Windows

an inofficial Windows port is available

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X
Unix
Windows

Linux

Data scheme

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

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

restricted

only exact value or prefix value scans

SQL

Support of SQL

Via inetgration in SQL Server

APIs and other access methods

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

C++ API
Thrift

Proprietary protocol

C++ API
Java API

Supported programming languages

C++
Java
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby

.Net
C
C++
ColdFusion
Erlang
Java
Lisp
Lua
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby

C
C++
Go
Java
Perl
Python
Ruby

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

via applications

Triggers

yes

via applications

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

none

horizontal partitioning

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

selectable replication factor

selectable replication factor on file system level

none

Repcached, a Memcached patch, provides this functionallity

yes

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

Transaction concepts

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

yes

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

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

yes

using SASL (Simple Authentication and Security Layer) protocol

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.