DBMS > IBM Db2 vs. JaguarDB vs. Memcached vs. Stardog

System Properties Comparison IBM Db2 vs. JaguarDB vs. Memcached vs. Stardog

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Common in IBM host environments, 2 different versions for host and Windows/Linux

Performant, highly scalable DBMS for AI and IoT applications

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

Enterprise Knowledge Graph platform and graph DBMS with high availability, high performance reasoning, and virtualization

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Since Version 10.5 support for JSON/BSON documents compatible with MongoDB

Key-value store
Vector DBMS

Key-value store

Graph DBMS
RDF store

Secondary database models

Document store
RDF store

in Db2 LUW (Linux, Unix, Windows)
Spatial DBMS

with Db2 Spatial Extender

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

Score	128.46
Rank	#8	Overall
	#5	Relational DBMS

Score	0.00
Rank	#383	Overall
	#60	Key-value stores
	#13	Vector DBMS

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

Score	2.02
Rank	#123	Overall
	#11	Graph DBMS
	#6	RDF stores

Website

www.ibm.com/products/db2

www.jaguardb.com

www.memcached.org

www.stardog.com

Technical documentation

www.ibm.com/docs/en/db2

www.jaguardb.com/support.html

github.com/memcached/memcached/wiki

docs.stardog.com

Developer

IBM

DataJaguar, Inc.

Danga Interactive

originally developed by Brad Fitzpatrick for LiveJournal

Stardog-Union

Initial release

1983

host version

2015

2003

2010

Current release

12.1, October 2016

3.3 July 2023

1.6.25, March 2024

7.3.0, May 2020

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free version is available

Open Source

GPL V3.0

Open Source

BSD license

commercial

60-day fully-featured trial license; 1-year fully-featured non-commercial use license for academics/students

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 and C++

C++

the server part. Clients available in other languages

Java

Server operating systems

AIX
HP-UX
Linux
Solaris
Windows
z/OS

Linux

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X
Unix
Windows

Linux
macOS
Windows

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

schema-free and OWL/RDFS-schema support

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.

Import/export of XML data possible

Secondary indexes

yes

supports real-time indexing in full-text and geospatial

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

A subset of ANSI SQL is implemented

but no views, foreign keys, triggers

Yes, compatible with all major SQL variants through dedicated BI/SQL Server

APIs and other access methods

ADO.NET
JDBC
JSON style queries

MongoDB compatible
ODBC
XQuery

JDBC
ODBC

Proprietary protocol

GraphQL query language
HTTP API
Jena RDF API
OWL
RDF4J API
Sesame REST HTTP Protocol
SNARL
SPARQL
Spring Data
Stardog Studio
TinkerPop 3

Supported programming languages

C
C#
C++
Cobol
Delphi
Fortran
Java
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby
Visual Basic

C
C++
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scala

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

.Net
Clojure
Groovy
Java
JavaScript
Python
Ruby

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

user defined functions and aggregates, HTTP Server extensions in Java

Triggers

yes

via event handlers

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

only with Windows/Unix/Linux Version

Sharding

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

with separate tools (MQ, InfoSphere)

Multi-source replication

none

Repcached, a Memcached patch, provides this functionallity

Multi-source replication in HA-Cluster

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Eventual Consistency

Immediate Consistency in HA-Cluster

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

relationships in graphs

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

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

rights management via user accounts

yes

using SASL (Simple Authentication and Security Layer) protocol

Access rights for users and 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.

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

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

What are memcached servers, and why are they being used to launch record-setting DDoS attacks?
6 March 2018, GeekWire

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

Why Redis beats Memcached for caching
14 September 2017, InfoWorld

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

provided by Google News

Share this page