DBMS > GeoSpock vs. IBM Cloudant vs. OpenQM vs. SQLite vs. Valentina Server

System Properties Comparison GeoSpock vs. IBM Cloudant vs. OpenQM vs. SQLite vs. Valentina Server

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

GeoSpock seems to be discontinued. Therefore it will be excluded from the DB-Engines ranking.

Description

Spatial and temporal data processing engine for extreme data scale

Database as a Service offering based on Apache CouchDB

QpenQM is a high-performance, self-tuning, multi-value DBMS

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

Object-relational database and reports server

Primary database model

Secondary database models

Time Series DBMS

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

Score	2.75
Rank	#104	Overall
	#19	Document stores

Score	0.34
Rank	#284	Overall
	#10	Multivalue DBMS

Score	111.41
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Score	0.21
Rank	#325	Overall
	#144	Relational DBMS

Website

geospock.com

www.ibm.com/products/cloudant

www.rocketsoftware.com/products/rocket-multivalue-application-development-platform/rocket-open-qm

www.sqlite.org

www.valentina-db.net

Technical documentation

cloud.ibm.com/docs/Cloudant

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

valentina-db.com/docs/dokuwiki/v5/doku.php

Developer

GeoSpock

IBM, Apache Software Foundation

IBM acquired Cloudant in February 2014

Rocket Software, originally Martin Phillips

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Paradigma Software

Initial release

2010

1993

2000

1999

Current release

2.0, September 2019

3.4-12

3.46.0 (23 May 2024), May 2024

5.7.5

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

GPLv2, extended commercial license available

Open Source

Public Domain

commercial

Cloud-based only

Only available as a cloud service

yes

DBaaS offerings (sponsored links)

Database as a Service

Providers of DBaaS offerings, please contact us to be listed.

Implementation language

Java, Javascript

Erlang

Server operating systems

hosted

AIX
FreeBSD
Linux
macOS
Raspberry Pi
Solaris
Windows

server-less

Linux
OS X
Windows

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

yes

with some exceptions

yes

dynamic column types

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

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

temporal, categorical

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

ANSI SQL for query only (using Presto)

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

yes

APIs and other access methods

JDBC

RESTful HTTP/JSON API

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

ODBC

Supported programming languages

C#
Java
JavaScript
Objective-C
PHP
Ruby

.Net
Basic
C
Java
Objective C
PHP
Python

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

.Net
C
C#
C++
Objective-C
PHP
Ruby
Visual Basic
Visual Basic.NET

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

View functions (Map-Reduce) in JavaScript

yes

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Automatic sharding

Sharding

yes

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

yes

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

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

atomic operations within a document possible

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Optimistic locking

yes

via file-system locks

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

Access rights for users can be defined per table

Access rights for users can be defined per database

Access rights can be defined down to the item level

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.