DBMS > FatDB vs. Lovefield vs. OrientDB vs. Quasardb vs. SQLite

System Properties Comparison FatDB vs. Lovefield vs. OrientDB vs. Quasardb vs. SQLite

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 relational database for web apps written in pure JavaScript

Multi-model DBMS (Document, Graph, Key/Value)

Distributed, high-performance timeseries database

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Document store
Graph DBMS
Key-value store

Time Series DBMS

Relational DBMS

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

Score	0.32
Rank	#290	Overall
	#132	Relational DBMS

Score	3.27
Rank	#97	Overall
	#16	Document stores
	#6	Graph DBMS
	#15	Key-value stores

Score	0.19
Rank	#327	Overall
	#30	Time Series DBMS

Score	116.01
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Website

google.github.io/lovefield

orientdb.org

quasar.ai

www.sqlite.org

Technical documentation

github.com/google/lovefield/blob/master/docs/spec_index.md

www.orientdb.com/docs/last/index.html

doc.quasar.ai/master

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

Developer

FatCloud

Google

OrientDB LTD; CallidusCloud; SAP

quasardb

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Initial release

2012

2014

2010

2009

2000

Current release

2.1.12, February 2017

3.2.29, March 2024

3.14.1, January 2024

3.45.2 (12 March 2024), March 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

Apache version 2

commercial

Free community edition, Non-profit organizations and non-commercial usage are eligible for free licenses

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

JavaScript

Java

C++

Server operating systems

Windows

server-less, requires a JavaScript environment (browser, Node.js)

tested with Chrome, Firefox, IE, Safari

All OS with a Java JDK (>= JDK 6)

BSD
Linux
OS X
Windows

server-less

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

schema-free

Schema can be enforced for whole record ("schema-full") or for some fields only ("schema-hybrid")

schema-free

yes

dynamic column types

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

integer and binary

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

with tags

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

Via inetgration in SQL Server

SQL-like query language

via JavaScript builder pattern

SQL-like query language, no joins

SQL-like query language

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

APIs and other access methods

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

Tinkerpop technology stack with Blueprints, Gremlin, Pipes
Java API
RESTful HTTP/JSON API

HTTP API

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

Supported programming languages

JavaScript

.Net
C
C#
C++
Clojure
Java
JavaScript
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scala

.Net
C
C#
C++
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
R

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

Java, Javascript

Triggers

yes

via applications

Using read-only observers

Hooks

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

none

Sharding

consistent hashing

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

selectable replication factor

none

Multi-source replication

Source-replica replication with selectable replication factor

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

could be achieved with distributed queries

with Hadoop integration

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

relationship in graphs

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

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

yes, by using IndexedDB or the cloud service Firebase Realtime Database

yes

by using LevelDB

yes

In-memory capabilities

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

yes

using MemoryDB

yes

Transient mode

yes

User concepts

Access control

Can implement custom security layer via applications

Access rights for users and roles; record level security configurable

Cryptographically strong user authentication and audit trail

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.