DBMS > etcd vs. FatDB vs. MySQL vs. SpatiaLite

System Properties Comparison etcd vs. FatDB vs. MySQL vs. SpatiaLite

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 distributed reliable key-value store

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

Widely used open source RDBMS

Spatial extension of SQLite

Primary database model

Key-value store

Document store
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Key/Value like access via memcached API

Spatial DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Spatial DBMS

Relational DBMS

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

Score	7.64
Rank	#54	Overall
	#5	Key-value stores

Score	1087.72
Rank	#2	Overall
	#2	Relational DBMS

Score	1.72
Rank	#149	Overall
	#3	Spatial DBMS

Website

etcd.io
github.com/etcd-io/etcd

www.mysql.com

www.gaia-gis.it/fossil/libspatialite/index

Technical documentation

etcd.io/docs
github.com/etcd-io/etcd/tree/master/Documentation

dev.mysql.com/doc

www.gaia-gis.it/gaia-sins/spatialite_topics.html

Developer

FatCloud

Oracle

since 2010, originally MySQL AB, then Sun

Alessandro Furieri

Initial release

2012

1995

2008

Current release

3.4, August 2019

8.3.0, January 2024

5.0.0, August 2020

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

commercial

Open Source

GPL version 2. Commercial licenses with extended functionallity are available

Open Source

MPL 1.1, GPL v2.0 or LGPL v2.1

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.

Aiven for MySQL: Fully managed MySQL, deployable in the cloud of your choice, with seamless integrations and lightning-fast setup.

Implementation language

C and C++

C++

Server operating systems

FreeBSD
Linux
Windows

experimental

Windows

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

server-less

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

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.

yes

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

Via inetgration in SQL Server

yes

with proprietary extensions

yes

APIs and other access methods

gRPC
JSON over HTTP

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

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
Proprietary native API

Supported programming languages

.Net
C
C++
Clojure
Erlang
Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Perl
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Rust
Scala
Tcl

Ada
C
C#
C++
D
Delphi
Eiffel
Erlang
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scheme
Tcl

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

via applications

yes

proprietary syntax

Triggers

yes, watching key changes

yes

via applications

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

horizontal partitioning, sharding with MySQL Cluster or MySQL Fabric

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Using Raft consensus algorithm to ensure data replication with strong consistency among multiple replicas.

selectable replication factor

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

not for MyISAM storage engine

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

not for MyISAM storage engine

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

table locks or row locks depending on storage engine

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

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

no user groups or 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.