DBMS > HarperDB vs. Memcached vs. MySQL vs. Splice Machine

System Properties Comparison HarperDB vs. Memcached vs. MySQL vs. Splice Machine

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

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.

In-memory key-value store, originally intended for caching

Widely used open source RDBMS

Open-Source SQL RDBMS for Operational and Analytical use cases with native Machine Learning, powered by Hadoop and Spark

Primary database model

Document store

Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Key/Value like access via memcached API

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	0.60
Rank	#244	Overall
	#38	Document stores

Score	18.08
Rank	#32	Overall
	#4	Key-value stores

Score	1061.34
Rank	#2	Overall
	#2	Relational DBMS

Score	0.54
Rank	#252	Overall
	#115	Relational DBMS

Website

Technical documentation

docs.harperdb.io/docs

github.com/memcached/memcached/wiki

dev.mysql.com/doc

splicemachine.com/how-it-works

Developer

HarperDB

Danga Interactive

originally developed by Brad Fitzpatrick for LiveJournal

Oracle

since 2010, originally MySQL AB, then Sun

Splice Machine

Initial release

2017

2003

1995

2014

Current release

3.1, August 2021

1.6.27, May 2024

8.4.0, April 2024

3.1, March 2021

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free community edition available

Open Source

BSD license

Open Source

GPL version 2. Commercial licenses with extended functionallity are available

Open Source

AGPL 3.0, commercial license available

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

Node.js

C and C++

Java

Server operating systems

Linux
OS X

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X
Unix
Windows

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

Data scheme

dynamic schema

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

JSON data types

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

SQL-like data manipulation statements

yes

with proprietary extensions

yes

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC
React Hooks
RESTful HTTP/JSON API
WebSocket

Proprietary protocol

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
Proprietary native API

JDBC
Native Spark Datasource
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

.Net
C
C++
ColdFusion
Erlang
Java
Lisp
Lua
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby

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

C#
C++
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python
R
Scala

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Custom Functions

since release 3.1

yes

proprietary syntax

yes

Java

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

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

none

horizontal partitioning, sharding with MySQL Cluster or MySQL Fabric

Shared Nothhing Auto-Sharding, Columnar Partitioning

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

the nodes on which a table resides can be defined

none

Repcached, a Memcached patch, provides this functionallity

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Yes, via Full Spark Integration

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

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

Atomic execution of specific operations

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, multi-version concurrency control (MVCC)

Durability

Support for making data persistent

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

Access rights for users and roles

yes

using SASL (Simple Authentication and Security Layer) protocol

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

no user groups or roles

Access rights for users, groups and roles 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.