DBMS > GBase vs. HarperDB vs. SQLite vs. Yaacomo

System Properties Comparison GBase vs. HarperDB vs. SQLite vs. Yaacomo

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Yaacomo seems to be discontinued and is removed from the DB-Engines ranking

Description

Widely used RDBMS in China, including analytical, transactional, distributed transactional, and cloud-native data warehousing.

Ultra-low latency distributed database with an intuitive REST API supporting NoSQL and SQL (including joins). Deployment of functions and databases simultaneously with a consolidated node-level architecture.

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

OpenCL based in-memory RDBMS, designed for efficiently utilizing the hardware via parallel computing

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Document store

Relational DBMS

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

Score	1.07
Rank	#185	Overall
	#86	Relational DBMS

Score	0.55
Rank	#248	Overall
	#38	Document stores

Score	114.32
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Website

www.gbase.cn

www.harperdb.io

www.sqlite.org

yaacomo.com

Technical documentation

docs.harperdb.io/docs

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

Developer

General Data Technology Co., Ltd.

HarperDB

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Q2WEB GmbH

Initial release

2004

2017

2000

2009

Current release

GBase 8a, GBase 8s, GBase 8c

3.1, August 2021

3.45.3 (15 April 2024), April 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free community edition available

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, Java, Python

Node.js

Server operating systems

Linux

Linux
OS X

server-less

Android
Linux
Windows

Data scheme

yes

dynamic schema

yes

dynamic column types

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

JSON data types

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.

yes

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

Standard with numerous extensions

SQL-like data manipulation statements

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

yes

APIs and other access methods

ADO.NET
C API
JDBC
ODBC

JDBC
ODBC
React Hooks
RESTful HTTP/JSON API
WebSocket

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

.Net
C
C#
C++
ColdFusion
D
Dart
Delphi
Erlang
Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Lisp
MatLab
Objective C
Perl
PHP
PowerShell
Prolog
Python
R
Ruby
Rust
Scala
Swift

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

user defined functions

Custom Functions

since release 3.1

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

horizontal partitioning (by range, list and hash) and vertical partitioning

A table resides as a whole on one (or more) nodes in a cluster

none

horizontal partitioning

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

the nodes on which a table resides can be defined

none

Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Atomic execution of specific operations

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

via file-system locks

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

yes, using LMDB

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

yes

Access rights for users and roles

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

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.