DBMS > Graph Engine vs. Hypertable vs. SQLite vs. Sqrrl

System Properties Comparison Graph Engine vs. Hypertable vs. SQLite vs. Sqrrl

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Hypertable has stopped its further development with March 2016 and is removed from the DB-Engines ranking.

Sqrrl has been acquired by Amazon and became a part of Amazon Web Services. It has been removed from the DB-Engines ranking.

Description

A distributed in-memory data processing engine, underpinned by a strongly-typed RAM store and a general distributed computation engine

An open source BigTable implementation based on distributed file systems such as Hadoop

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

Adaptable, secure NoSQL built on Apache Accumulo

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
Key-value store

Wide column store

Relational DBMS

Document store
Graph DBMS
Key-value store
Wide column store

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

Score	0.62
Rank	#240	Overall
	#21	Graph DBMS
	#35	Key-value stores

Score	116.01
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Website

www.graphengine.io

www.sqlite.org

sqrrl.com

Technical documentation

www.graphengine.io/docs/manual

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

Developer

Microsoft

Hypertable Inc.

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Amazon

originally Sqrrl Data, Inc.

Initial release

2010

2009

2000

2012

Current release

0.9.8.11, March 2016

3.45.3 (15 April 2024), April 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

MIT License

Open Source

GNU version 3. Commercial license 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

.NET and C

C++

Java

Server operating systems

.NET

Linux
OS X
Windows

an inofficial Windows port is available

server-less

Linux

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

yes

dynamic column types

schema-free

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.

Secondary indexes

restricted

only exact value or prefix value scans

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

APIs and other access methods

RESTful HTTP API

C++ API
Thrift

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

Accumulo Shell
Java API
JDBC
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API
Thrift

Supported programming languages

C#
C++
F#
Visual Basic

C++
Java
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby

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

Actionscript
C

using GLib
C#
C++
Cocoa
Delphi
Erlang
Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby
Smalltalk

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

horizontal partitioning

Sharding

none

Sharding

making use of Hadoop

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

selectable replication factor on file system level

none

selectable replication factor

making use of Hadoop

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Document store kept consistent with combination of global timestamping, row-level transactions, and server-side consistency resolution.

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Atomic updates per row, document, or graph entity

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

via file-system locks

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

optional: either by committing a write-ahead log (WAL) to the local persistent storage or by dumping the memory to a persistent storage

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

Cell-level Security, Data-Centric Security, Role-Based Access Control (RBAC), Attribute-Based Access Control (ABAC)

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.