DBMS > etcd vs. Interbase vs. MySQL vs. Yanza

System Properties Comparison etcd vs. Interbase vs. MySQL vs. Yanza

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Yanza seems to be discontinued. Therefore it is excluded from the DB-Engines Ranking.

Description

A distributed reliable key-value store

Light-weight proven RDBMS

originally from Borland

Widely used open source RDBMS

Time Series DBMS for IoT Applications

Primary database model

Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Key/Value like access via memcached API

Time Series DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	7.64
Rank	#54	Overall
	#5	Key-value stores

Score	5.04
Rank	#71	Overall
	#39	Relational DBMS

Score	1087.72
Rank	#2	Overall
	#2	Relational DBMS

Website

etcd.io
github.com/etcd-io/etcd

www.embarcadero.com/products/interbase

www.mysql.com

yanza.com

Technical documentation

etcd.io/docs
github.com/etcd-io/etcd/tree/master/Documentation

docs.embarcadero.com/products/interbase

dev.mysql.com/doc

Developer

Embarcadero

Oracle

since 2010, originally MySQL AB, then Sun

Yanza

Initial release

1984

1995

2015

Current release

3.4, August 2019

InterBase 2020, December 2019

8.3.0, January 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

commercial

Open Source

GPL version 2. Commercial licenses with extended functionallity are available

commercial

free version available

Cloud-based only

Only available as a cloud service

but mainly used as a service provided by Yanza

DBaaS offerings (sponsored links)

Database as a Service

Providers of DBaaS offerings, please contact us to be listed.

Aiven for MySQL: Fully managed MySQL, deployable in the cloud of your choice, with seamless integrations and lightning-fast setup.

Implementation language

C and C++

Server operating systems

FreeBSD
Linux
Windows

experimental

Android
iOS
Linux
OS X
Windows

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

Windows

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

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.

export as XML data possible

yes

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

with proprietary extensions

APIs and other access methods

gRPC
JSON over HTTP

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
Proprietary native API

HTTP API

Supported programming languages

.Net
C
C++
Clojure
Erlang
Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Perl
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Rust
Scala
Tcl

.Net
C
C++
Delphi
Java
Object Pascal
PHP
Ruby

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

any language that supports HTTP calls

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Interbase procedure and trigger language

yes

proprietary syntax

Triggers

yes, watching key changes

yes

Timer and event based

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

horizontal partitioning, sharding with MySQL Cluster or MySQL Fabric

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Using Raft consensus algorithm to ensure data replication with strong consistency among multiple replicas.

Interbase Change Views

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

not for MyISAM storage engine

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

not for MyISAM storage engine

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Multiversion concurreny control

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

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

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.