DBMS > FatDB vs. Infobright vs. JaguarDB vs. SQLite vs. Transwarp ArgoDB

System Properties Comparison FatDB vs. Infobright vs. JaguarDB vs. SQLite vs. Transwarp ArgoDB

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.

High performant column-oriented DBMS for analytic workloads using MySQL or PostgreSQL as a frontend

Performant, highly scalable DBMS for AI and IoT applications

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

Distributed Analytical Database to replace Hadoop+MPP hybrid architecture

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Key-value store
Vector DBMS

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Search engine

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

Score	1.02
Rank	#192	Overall
	#90	Relational DBMS

Score	0.06
Rank	#381	Overall
	#59	Key-value stores
	#13	Vector DBMS

Score	111.41
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Score	0.12
Rank	#348	Overall
	#151	Relational DBMS

Website

ignitetech.com/softwarelibrary/infobrightdb

www.jaguardb.com

www.sqlite.org

www.transwarp.cn/en/product/argodb

Technical documentation

www.jaguardb.com/support.html

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

docs.transwarp.cn/#/documents-support/docs?category=ARGODB

Developer

FatCloud

Ignite Technologies Inc.; formerly InfoBright Inc.

DataJaguar, Inc.

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Transwarp

Initial release

2012

2005

2015

2000

Current release

3.3 July 2023

3.46.0 (23 May 2024), May 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

The open source (GPLv2) version did not support inserts/updates/deletes and was discontinued with July 2016

Open Source

GPL V3.0

Open Source

Public Domain

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++

the server part. Clients available in other languages

Server operating systems

Windows

Linux
Windows

Linux

server-less

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

Knowledge Grid Technology used instead

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

Via inetgration in SQL Server

yes

A subset of ANSI SQL is implemented

but no views, foreign keys, triggers

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

yes

APIs and other access methods

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

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

JDBC
ODBC

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

Supported programming languages

.Net
C
C#
C++
D
Eiffel
Erlang
Haskell
Java
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scheme
Tcl

C
C++
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
Ruby
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

Triggers

yes

via applications

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

none

Sharding

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

selectable replication factor

Source-replica replication

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

Immediate Consistency

Eventual 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 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

exploiting MySQL or PostgreSQL frontend capabilities

rights management via user accounts

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.