DBMS > FatDB vs. LevelDB vs. Linter vs. Newts vs. Percona Server for MongoDB

System Properties Comparison FatDB vs. LevelDB vs. Linter vs. Newts vs. Percona Server for MongoDB

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.

Embeddable fast key-value storage library that provides an ordered mapping from string keys to string values

RDBMS for high security requirements

Time Series DBMS based on Cassandra

A drop-in replacement for MongoDB Community Edition with enterprise-grade features.

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Secondary database models

Spatial DBMS

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

Score	2.35
Rank	#111	Overall
	#19	Key-value stores

Score	0.09
Rank	#346	Overall
	#152	Relational DBMS

Score	0.00
Rank	#383	Overall
	#41	Time Series DBMS

Score	0.52
Rank	#254	Overall
	#39	Document stores

Website

github.com/google/leveldb

linter.ru

opennms.github.io/newts

www.percona.com/mongodb/software/percona-server-for-mongodb

Technical documentation

github.com/google/leveldb/blob/main/doc/index.md

github.com/OpenNMS/newts/wiki

docs.percona.com/percona-distribution-for-mongodb

Developer

FatCloud

Google

relex.ru

OpenNMS Group

Percona

Initial release

2012

2011

1990

2014

2015

Current release

1.23, February 2021

3.4.10-2.10, November 2017

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

BSD

commercial

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

GPL Version 2

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++

C and C++

Java

C++

Server operating systems

Windows

Illumos
Linux
OS X
Windows

AIX
Android
BSD
HP Open VMS
iOS
Linux
OS X
VxWorks
Windows

Linux
OS X
Windows

Linux

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

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

SQL

Support of SQL

Via inetgration in SQL Server

yes

APIs and other access methods

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

ADO.NET
JDBC
LINQ
ODBC
OLE DB
Oracle Call Interface (OCI)

HTTP REST
Java API

proprietary protocol using JSON

Supported programming languages

C++
Go
Java

3rd party binding
JavaScript (Node.js)

3rd party binding
Python

3rd party binding

C
C#
C++
Java
Perl
PHP
Python
Qt
Ruby
Tcl

Java

Actionscript
C
C#
C++
Clojure
ColdFusion
D
Dart
Delphi
Erlang
Go
Groovy
Haskell
Java
JavaScript
Lisp
Lua
MatLab
Perl
PHP
PowerShell
Prolog
Python
R
Ruby
Scala
Smalltalk

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

via applications

yes

proprietary syntax with the possibility to convert from PL/SQL

JavaScript

Triggers

yes

via applications

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

none

Sharding

based on Cassandra

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

selectable replication factor

none

Source-replica replication

selectable replication factor

based on Cassandra

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

Eventual Consistency

based on Cassandra
Immediate Consistency

based on Cassandra

Eventual 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

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

with automatic compression on writes

yes

In-memory capabilities

Is there an option to define some or all structures to be held in-memory only.

yes

via In-Memory Engine

User concepts

Access control

Can implement custom security layer via applications

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

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.

Related products and services

We invite representatives of vendors of related products to contact us for presenting information about their offerings here.

More resources

Recent citations in the news

Pliops unveils XDP-Rocks for RocksDB – Blocks and Files
19 October 2022, Blocks & Files

Microsoft Teams stores auth tokens as cleartext in Windows, Linux, Macs
14 September 2022, BleepingComputer

XanMod, Liquorix Kernels Offer Some Advantages On AMD Ryzen 5 Notebook
26 July 2021, Phoronix

Threat Thursday: BlackGuard Infostealer Rises from Russian Underground Markets
21 April 2022, BlackBerry Blog

Rust-Based Info Stealers Abuse GitHub Codespaces
19 May 2023, Trend Micro

provided by Google News

5 Reasons to Run MongoDB on Kubernetes
6 March 2024, The New Stack

How to Plan Your MongoDB Upgrade
29 January 2024, The New Stack

FerretDB goes GA: Gives you MongoDB, without the MongoDB...
15 May 2023, The Stack

DB or not DB: Open-sourcer Percona pushes out plethora of SQL and NoSQL tweaks in bid to win over suits
19 May 2020, The Register

6 keys to MongoDB database security
22 May 2019, InfoWorld

provided by Google News

Share this page