DBMS > Heroic vs. Hypertable vs. LevelDB vs. RavenDB vs. RocksDB

System Properties Comparison Heroic vs. Hypertable vs. LevelDB vs. RavenDB vs. RocksDB

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

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

Description

Time Series DBMS built at Spotify based on Cassandra or Google Cloud Bigtable, and ElasticSearch

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

Embeddable fast key-value storage library that provides an ordered mapping from string keys to string values

Open Source Operational and Transactional Enterprise NoSQL Document Database

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

Primary database model

Secondary database models

Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS
Time Series DBMS

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

Score	0.51
Rank	#255	Overall
	#21	Time Series DBMS

Score	2.35
Rank	#111	Overall
	#19	Key-value stores

Score	2.92
Rank	#101	Overall
	#18	Document stores

Score	3.65
Rank	#85	Overall
	#11	Key-value stores

Website

github.com/spotify/heroic

github.com/google/leveldb

ravendb.net

rocksdb.org

Technical documentation

spotify.github.io/heroic

github.com/google/leveldb/blob/main/doc/index.md

ravendb.net/docs

github.com/facebook/rocksdb/wiki

Developer

Spotify

Hypertable Inc.

Google

Hibernating Rhinos

Facebook, Inc.

Initial release

2014

2009

2011

2010

2013

Current release

0.9.8.11, March 2016

1.23, February 2021

5.4, July 2022

8.11.4, April 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

GNU version 3. Commercial license available

Open Source

BSD

Open Source

AGPL version 3, commercial license available

Open Source

BSD

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++

Server operating systems

Linux
OS X
Windows

an inofficial Windows port is available

Illumos
Linux
OS X
Windows

Linux
macOS
Raspberry Pi
Windows

Linux

Data scheme

schema-free

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.

Secondary indexes

yes

via Elasticsearch

restricted

only exact value or prefix value scans

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language (RQL)

APIs and other access methods

HQL (Heroic Query Language, a JSON-based language)
HTTP API

C++ API
Thrift

.NET Client API
F# Client API
Go Client API
Java Client API
NodeJS Client API
PHP Client API
Python Client API
RESTful HTTP API

C++ API
Java API

Supported programming languages

C++
Java
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby

C++
Go
Java

3rd party binding
JavaScript (Node.js)

3rd party binding
Python

3rd party binding

.Net
C#
F#
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
Ruby

C
C++
Go
Java
Perl
Python
Ruby

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

none

Sharding

horizontal partitioning

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

selectable replication factor on file system level

none

Multi-source replication

yes

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Immediate Consistency

Default ACID transactions on the local node (eventually consistent across the cluster). Atomic operations with cluster-wide ACID transactions. Eventual consistency for indexes and full-text search indexes.

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

Transaction concepts

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

ACID, Cluster-wide transaction available

yes

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

with automatic compression on writes

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

Authorization levels configured per client per database

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.