DBMS > Hazelcast vs. Hyprcubd vs. Ingres vs. Oracle Berkeley DB vs. RocksDB

System Properties Comparison Hazelcast vs. Hyprcubd vs. Ingres vs. Oracle Berkeley DB vs. RocksDB

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Hyprcubd seems to be discontinued. Therefore it is excluded from the DB-Engines ranking.

Description

A widely adopted in-memory data grid

Serverless Time Series DBMS

Well established RDBMS

Widely used in-process key-value store

Embeddable persistent key-value store optimized for fast storage (flash and RAM)

Primary database model

supports sorted and unsorted key sets
Native XML DBMS

in the Oracle Berkeley DB XML version

Key-value store

Secondary database models

Document store

JSON support with IMDG 3.12

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

Score	5.46
Rank	#61	Overall
	#7	Key-value stores

Score	3.80
Rank	#82	Overall
	#44	Relational DBMS

Score	2.01
Rank	#126	Overall
	#21	Key-value stores
	#3	Native XML DBMS

Score	3.41
Rank	#86	Overall
	#11	Key-value stores

Website

hazelcast.com

hyprcubd.com (offline)

www.actian.com/databases/ingres

www.oracle.com/database/technologies/related/berkeleydb.html

rocksdb.org

Technical documentation

hazelcast.org/imdg/docs

docs.actian.com/ingres

docs.oracle.com/cd/E17076_05/html/index.html

github.com/facebook/rocksdb/wiki

Developer

Hazelcast

Hyprcubd, Inc.

Actian Corporation

Oracle

originally developed by Sleepycat, which was acquired by Oracle

Facebook, Inc.

Initial release

2008

1974

originally developed at University Berkely in early 1970s

1994

2013

Current release

5.3.6, November 2023

11.2, May 2022

18.1.40, May 2020

9.2.1, May 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache Version 2; commercial licenses available

commercial

Open Source

commercial license available

Open Source

BSD

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

C, Java, C++ (depending on the Berkeley DB edition)

C++

Server operating systems

All OS with a Java VM

hosted

AIX
HP Open VMS
HP-UX
Linux
Solaris
Windows

AIX
Android
FreeBSD
iOS
Linux
OS X
Solaris
VxWorks
Windows

Linux

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

time, int, uint, float, string

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

the object must implement a serialization strategy

but tools for importing/exporting data from/to XML-files available

yes

only with the Berkeley DB XML edition

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language

yes

SQL interfaced based on SQLite is available

APIs and other access methods

JCache
JPA
Memcached protocol
RESTful HTTP API

gRPC (https)

.NET Client API
JDBC
ODBC
proprietary protocol (OpenAPI)

C++ API
Java API

Supported programming languages

.Net
C#
C++
Clojure
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python
Scala

.Net

Figaro is a .Net framework assembly that extends Berkeley DB XML into an embeddable database engine for .NET
others

Third-party libraries to manipulate Berkeley DB files are available for many languages
C
C#
C++
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)

3rd party binding
Perl
Python
Tcl

C
C++
Go
Java
Perl
Python
Ruby

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Event Listeners, Executor Services

yes

Triggers

yes

Events

yes

only for the SQL API

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

horizontal partitioning

Ingres Star to access multiple databases simultaneously

none

horizontal partitioning

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Replicated Map

Ingres Replicator

Source-replica replication

yes

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency selectable by user

Raft Consensus Algorithm

Eventual Consistency

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

one or two-phase-commit; repeatable reads; read commited

ACID

yes

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

MVCC

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

Role-based access control

token access

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.