DBMS > LevelDB vs. Lovefield vs. MySQL vs. VelocityDB

System Properties Comparison LevelDB vs. Lovefield vs. MySQL vs. VelocityDB

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

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

Embeddable relational database for web apps written in pure JavaScript

Widely used open source RDBMS

A .NET Object Database that can be embedded/distributed and extended to a graph data model (VelocityGraph)

Primary database model

Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Key/Value like access via memcached API

Graph DBMS
Object oriented DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	2.25
Rank	#115	Overall
	#19	Key-value stores

Score	0.33
Rank	#286	Overall
	#131	Relational DBMS

Score	1061.34
Rank	#2	Overall
	#2	Relational DBMS

Score	0.11
Rank	#354	Overall
	#37	Graph DBMS
	#15	Object oriented DBMS

Website

github.com/google/leveldb

google.github.io/lovefield

www.mysql.com

velocitydb.com

Technical documentation

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

github.com/google/lovefield/blob/master/docs/spec_index.md

dev.mysql.com/doc

velocitydb.com/UserGuide

Developer

Google

Oracle

since 2010, originally MySQL AB, then Sun

VelocityDB Inc

Initial release

2011

2014

1995

2011

Current release

1.23, February 2021

2.1.12, February 2017

8.4.0, April 2024

7.x

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

BSD

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

GPL version 2. Commercial licenses with extended functionallity are available

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.

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

Implementation language

C++

JavaScript

C and C++

Server operating systems

Illumos
Linux
OS X
Windows

server-less, requires a JavaScript environment (browser, Node.js)

tested with Chrome, Firefox, IE, Safari

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

Any that supports .NET

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

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.

yes

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language

via JavaScript builder pattern

yes

with proprietary extensions

APIs and other access methods

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
Proprietary native API

.Net

Supported programming languages

C++
Go
Java

3rd party binding
JavaScript (Node.js)

3rd party binding
Python

3rd party binding

JavaScript

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

.Net

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

proprietary syntax

Triggers

Using read-only observers

yes

Callbacks are triggered when data changes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

horizontal partitioning, sharding with MySQL Cluster or MySQL Fabric

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

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

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

table locks or row locks depending on storage engine

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

with automatic compression on writes

yes, by using IndexedDB or the cloud service Firebase Realtime Database

yes

In-memory capabilities

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

yes

using MemoryDB

yes

User concepts

Access control

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

no user groups or roles

Based on Windows Authentication

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.