DBMS > FatDB vs. LevelDB vs. mSQL vs. Stardog

System Properties Comparison FatDB vs. LevelDB vs. mSQL vs. Stardog

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.

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

mSQL (Mini SQL) is a simple and lightweight RDBMS

Enterprise Knowledge Graph platform and graph DBMS with high availability, high performance reasoning, and virtualization

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Graph DBMS
RDF store

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

Score	2.25
Rank	#115	Overall
	#19	Key-value stores

Score	1.27
Rank	#169	Overall
	#76	Relational DBMS

Score	2.07
Rank	#122	Overall
	#11	Graph DBMS
	#6	RDF stores

Website

github.com/google/leveldb

hughestech.com.au/products/msql

www.stardog.com

Technical documentation

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

docs.stardog.com

Developer

FatCloud

Google

Hughes Technologies

Stardog-Union

Initial release

2012

2011

1994

2010

Current release

1.23, February 2021

4.4, October 2021

7.3.0, May 2020

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

BSD

commercial

free licenses can be provided

commercial

60-day fully-featured trial license; 1-year fully-featured non-commercial use license for academics/students

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++

Java

Server operating systems

Windows

Illumos
Linux
OS X
Windows

AIX
HP-UX
Linux
OS X
Solaris SPARC/x86
Windows

Linux
macOS
Windows

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

schema-free and OWL/RDFS-schema support

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.

Import/export of XML data possible

Secondary indexes

yes

supports real-time indexing in full-text and geospatial

SQL

Support of SQL

Via inetgration in SQL Server

A subset of ANSI SQL is implemented

no subqueries, aggregate functions, views, foreign keys, triggers

Yes, compatible with all major SQL variants through dedicated BI/SQL Server

APIs and other access methods

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

JDBC
ODBC

GraphQL query language
HTTP API
Jena RDF API
OWL
RDF4J API
Sesame REST HTTP Protocol
SNARL
SPARQL
Spring Data
Stardog Studio
TinkerPop 3

Supported programming languages

C++
Go
Java

3rd party binding
JavaScript (Node.js)

3rd party binding
Python

3rd party binding

C
C++
Delphi
Java
Perl
PHP
Tcl

.Net
Clojure
Groovy
Java
JavaScript
Python
Ruby

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

via applications

user defined functions and aggregates, HTTP Server extensions in Java

Triggers

yes

via applications

yes

via event handlers

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

none

Multi-source replication in HA-Cluster

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

none

Immediate Consistency in HA-Cluster

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

relationships in graphs

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

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.

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

Malicious npm 'colors' typosquats pack Discord malware
3 May 2022, Sonatype Blog

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

provided by Google News

Higher Education PS rules out ghost students before PAC
29 November 2018, diggers.news

provided by Google News

Share this page