DBMS > Kinetica vs. RavenDB vs. SAP SQL Anywhere vs. SQLite vs. Tibero

System Properties Comparison Kinetica vs. RavenDB vs. SAP SQL Anywhere vs. SQLite vs. Tibero

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Fully vectorized database across both GPUs and CPUs

Open Source Operational and Transactional Enterprise NoSQL Document Database

RDBMS database and synchronization technologies for server, desktop, remote office, and mobile environments

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

A secure RDBMS, designed for easy portability from Oracle

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Document store

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Spatial DBMS
Time Series DBMS

Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS
Time Series DBMS

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

Score	0.64
Rank	#236	Overall
	#109	Relational DBMS

Score	2.92
Rank	#101	Overall
	#18	Document stores

Score	4.25
Rank	#79	Overall
	#43	Relational DBMS

Score	114.32
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Score	1.78
Rank	#140	Overall
	#64	Relational DBMS

Website

www.kinetica.com

ravendb.net

www.sap.com/products/technology-platform/sql-anywhere.html

www.sqlite.org

us.tmaxsoft.com/products/tibero

Technical documentation

docs.kinetica.com

ravendb.net/docs

help.sap.com/docs/SAP_SQL_Anywhere

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

technet.tmaxsoft.com/upload/download/online/tibero/pver-20150504-000002/index.html

Developer

Kinetica

Hibernating Rhinos

SAP

formerly Sybase

Dwayne Richard Hipp

TmaxSoft

Initial release

2012

2010

1992

2000

2003

Current release

7.1, August 2021

5.4, July 2022

17, July 2015

3.45.3 (15 April 2024), April 2024

6, April 2015

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

AGPL version 3, commercial license available

commercial

Open Source

Public Domain

commercial

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++

C and Assembler

Server operating systems

Linux

Linux
macOS
Raspberry Pi
Windows

AIX
HP-UX
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

server-less

AIX
HP-UX
Linux
Solaris
Windows

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

yes

dynamic column types

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

not rigid because of 'dynamic typing' concept.

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

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like DML and DDL statements

SQL-like query language (RQL)

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

yes

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

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

ADO.NET
HTTP API
JDBC
ODBC

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

JDBC
ODBC
ODP.NET
Oracle Call Interface (OCI)
Tibero CLI

Supported programming languages

C++
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

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

C
C#
C++
Delphi
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby

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

C
C#
C++
Cobol
Java
Objective-C
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby
Visual Basic

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

yes

yes, in C/C++, Java, .Net or Perl

Persistent Stored Procedure (PSM)

Triggers

yes

triggers when inserted values for one or more columns fall within a specified range

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

none

horizontal partitioning

by range, hash, list or composite

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Source-replica replication

Multi-source replication

Source-replica replication

Database mirroring

none

Multi-source replication
Source-replica 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 depending on configuration

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.

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID, Cluster-wide transaction available

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

via file-system locks

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

GPU vRAM or System RAM

yes

planned for next version

User concepts

Access control

Access rights for users and roles on table level

Authorization levels configured per client per database

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard (SQL 92, SQL 99)

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.