DBMS > Hypertable vs. Percona Server for MySQL vs. Quasardb vs. SQLite

System Properties Comparison Hypertable vs. Percona Server for MySQL vs. Quasardb vs. SQLite

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

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

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

Enhanced drop-in replacement for MySQL based on XtraDB or TokuDB storage engines with improved performance and additional diagnostic and management features.

Distributed, high-performance timeseries database

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

Primary database model

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

Score	2.10
Rank	#119	Overall
	#57	Relational DBMS

Score	0.21
Rank	#322	Overall
	#29	Time Series DBMS

Score	111.41
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Website

www.percona.com/software/mysql-database/percona-server

quasar.ai

www.sqlite.org

Technical documentation

www.percona.com/downloads/Percona-Server-LATEST

doc.quasar.ai/master

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

Developer

Hypertable Inc.

Percona

quasardb

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Initial release

2009

2008

2009

2000

Current release

0.9.8.11, March 2016

8.0.36-28, 2024

3.14.1, January 2024

3.46.0 (23 May 2024), May 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

GNU version 3. Commercial license available

Open Source

GPL version 2

commercial

Free community edition, Non-profit organizations and non-commercial usage are eligible for free licenses

Open Source

Public Domain

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

C++

C and C++

C++

Server operating systems

Linux
OS X
Windows

an inofficial Windows port is available

Linux

BSD
Linux
OS X
Windows

server-less

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

schema-free

yes

dynamic column types

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

integer and binary

yes

not rigid because of 'dynamic typing' concept.

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

restricted

only exact value or prefix value scans

yes

with tags

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

SQL-like query language

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

APIs and other access methods

C++ API
Thrift

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

HTTP API

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

Supported programming languages

C++
Java
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby

Ada
C
C#
C++
D
Eiffel
Erlang
Haskell
Java
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scheme
Tcl

.Net
C
C#
C++
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
R

Actionscript
Ada
Basic
C
C#
C++
D
Delphi
Forth
Fortran
Haskell
Java
JavaScript
Lisp
Lua
MatLab
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
PL/SQL
Python
R
Ruby
Scala
Scheme
Smalltalk
Tcl

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

consistent hashing

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

selectable replication factor on file system level

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication
XtraDB Cluster

Source-replica replication with selectable replication factor

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

with Hadoop integration

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

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

via file-system locks

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

by using LevelDB

yes

In-memory capabilities

Is there an option to define some or all structures to be held in-memory only.

yes

Transient mode

yes

User concepts

Access control

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

no user groups or roles

Cryptographically strong user authentication and audit trail

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.