DBMS > Hazelcast vs. MySQL vs. Ultipa vs. VictoriaMetrics

System Properties Comparison Hazelcast vs. MySQL vs. Ultipa vs. VictoriaMetrics

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

A widely adopted in-memory data grid

Widely used open source RDBMS

High performance Graph DBMS supporting HTAP high availability cluster deployment

A fast, cost-effective and scalable Time Series DBMS and monitoring solution

Primary database model

Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Key/Value like access via memcached API

Graph DBMS

Time Series DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store

JSON support with IMDG 3.12

Document store
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	5.72
Rank	#59	Overall
	#6	Key-value stores

Score	1029.49
Rank	#2	Overall
	#2	Relational DBMS

Score	0.11
Rank	#338	Overall
	#32	Graph DBMS

Score	1.23
Rank	#165	Overall
	#15	Time Series DBMS

Website

Technical documentation

hazelcast.org/imdg/docs

dev.mysql.com/doc

www.ultipa.com/document

docs.victoriametrics.com
github.com/VictoriaMetrics/VictoriaMetrics/wiki

Developer

Hazelcast

Oracle

since 2010, originally MySQL AB, then Sun

Ultipa

VictoriaMetrics

Initial release

2008

1995

2019

2018

Current release

5.3.6, November 2023

9.0.0, July 2024

v1.91, May 2023

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache Version 2; commercial licenses available

Open Source

GPL version 2. Commercial licenses with extended functionallity are available

commercial

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

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

C and C++

Server operating systems

All OS with a Java VM

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

FreeBSD
Linux
macOS
OpenBSD

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

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

yes

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language

yes

with proprietary extensions

APIs and other access methods

JCache
JPA
Memcached protocol
RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
Proprietary native API

RESTful HTTP API

Graphite protocol
InfluxDB Line Protocol
OpenTSDB
Prometheus Query API
Prometheus Remote Read/Write

Supported programming languages

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

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

C++
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Event Listeners, Executor Services

yes

proprietary syntax

Triggers

yes

Events

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

horizontal partitioning, sharding with MySQL Cluster or MySQL Fabric

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Replicated Map

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

Synchronous replication

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

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

not for MyISAM storage engine

Transaction concepts

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

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

ACID

not for MyISAM storage engine

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

table locks or row locks depending on storage engine

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

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

no user groups or roles

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.