DBMS > Hawkular Metrics vs. Memcached vs. TimescaleDB vs. Yaacomo

System Properties Comparison Hawkular Metrics vs. Memcached vs. TimescaleDB 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

Hawkular metrics is the metric storage of the Red Hat sponsored Hawkular monitoring system. It is based on Cassandra.

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

A time series DBMS optimized for fast ingest and complex queries, based on PostgreSQL

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

Primary database model

Secondary database models

Relational DBMS

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

Score	0.00
Rank	#379	Overall
	#40	Time Series DBMS

Score	19.42
Rank	#32	Overall
	#4	Key-value stores

Score	4.64
Rank	#71	Overall
	#4	Time Series DBMS

Website

www.hawkular.org

www.memcached.org

www.timescale.com

yaacomo.com

Technical documentation

www.hawkular.org/hawkular-metrics/docs/user-guide

github.com/memcached/memcached/wiki

docs.timescale.com

Developer

Community supported by Red Hat

Danga Interactive

originally developed by Brad Fitzpatrick for LiveJournal

Timescale

Q2WEB GmbH

Initial release

2014

2003

2017

2009

Current release

1.6.25, March 2024

2.15.0, May 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

BSD license

Open Source

Apache 2.0

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

Java

Server operating systems

Linux
OS X
Windows

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X
Unix
Windows

Linux
OS X
Windows

Android
Linux
Windows

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

numerics, strings, booleans, arrays, JSON blobs, geospatial dimensions, currencies, binary data, other complex 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

yes

full PostgreSQL SQL syntax

yes

APIs and other access methods

HTTP REST

Proprietary protocol

ADO.NET
JDBC
native C library
ODBC
streaming API for large objects

JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

Go
Java
Python
Ruby

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

.Net
C
C++
Delphi
Java

JDBC
JavaScript
Perl
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Scheme
Tcl

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions, PL/pgSQL, PL/Tcl, PL/Perl, PL/Python, PL/Java, PL/PHP, PL/R, PL/Ruby, PL/Scheme, PL/Unix shell

Triggers

yes

via Hawkular Alerting

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

based on Cassandra

none

yes, across time and space (hash partitioning) attributes

horizontal partitioning

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

selectable replication factor

based on Cassandra

none

Repcached, a Memcached patch, provides this functionallity

Source-replica replication with hot standby and reads on replicas

Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Eventual Consistency

based on Cassandra
Immediate Consistency

based on Cassandra

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

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

yes

using SASL (Simple Authentication and Security Layer) protocol

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.

Related products and services

We invite representatives of vendors of related products to contact us for presenting information about their offerings here.

More resources

DB-Engines blog posts

Redis extends the lead in the DB-Engines key-value store ranking
3 February 2014, Matthias Gelbmann

New DB-Engines Ranking shows the popularity of database management systems
3 October 2012, Matthias Gelbmann, Paul Andlinger

show all

Recent citations in the news

Waiting for Red Hat OpenShift 4.0? Too late, 4.1 has already arrived… • DEVCLASS
5 June 2019, DevClass

provided by Google News

Why DDoS Threat Actors Are Shifting Their Tactics
15 March 2024, Infosecurity Magazine

Redis Labs Boldly Joins AWS in Dropping Prices From 10 to 40 Percent
27 March 2024, Yahoo Lifestyle UK

Why Redis beats Memcached for caching
14 September 2017, InfoWorld

Introducing mcrouter: A memcached protocol router for scaling memcached deployments
15 September 2014, Facebook Engineering

Memcached DDoS: The biggest, baddest denial of service attacker yet
1 March 2018, ZDNet

provided by Google News

TimescaleDB Is a Vector Database Now, Too
25 September 2023, Datanami

Timescale Acquires PopSQL to Bring a Modern, Collaborative SQL GUI to PostgreSQL Developers
4 April 2024, PR Newswire

Power IoT and time-series workloads with TimescaleDB for Azure Database for PostgreSQL
18 March 2019, Microsoft

Timescale Valuation Rockets to Over $1B with $110M Round, Marking the Explosive Rise of Time-Series Data
22 February 2022, Business Wire

Visualizing IoT Data at Scale With Hopara and TimescaleDB
16 May 2023, Embedded Computing Design

provided by Google News

Share this page