DBMS > HEAVY.AI vs. LevelDB vs. Microsoft SQL Server vs. SQLite

System Properties Comparison HEAVY.AI vs. LevelDB vs. Microsoft SQL Server vs. SQLite

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

A high performance, column-oriented RDBMS, specifically developed to harness the massive parallelism of modern CPU and GPU hardware

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

Microsofts flagship relational DBMS

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Spatial DBMS

Document store
Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	1.77
Rank	#141	Overall
	#65	Relational DBMS

Score	2.35
Rank	#111	Overall
	#19	Key-value stores

Score	824.29
Rank	#3	Overall
	#3	Relational DBMS

Score	114.32
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Website

github.com/heavyai/heavydb
www.heavy.ai

github.com/google/leveldb

www.microsoft.com/en-us/sql-server

www.sqlite.org

Technical documentation

docs.heavy.ai

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

learn.microsoft.com/en-US/sql/sql-server

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

Developer

HEAVY.AI, Inc.

Google

Microsoft

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Initial release

2016

2011

1989

2000

Current release

5.10, January 2022

1.23, February 2021

SQL Server 2022, November 2022

3.45.3 (15 April 2024), April 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache Version 2; enterprise edition available

Open Source

BSD

commercial

restricted free version is available

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++ and CUDA

C++

Server operating systems

Linux

Illumos
Linux
OS X
Windows

Linux
Windows

server-less

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

yes

dynamic column types

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

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

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC
Thrift
Vega

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
OLE DB
Tabular Data Stream (TDS)

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC/Thrift
Python

C++
Go
Java

3rd party binding
JavaScript (Node.js)

3rd party binding
Python

3rd party binding

C#
C++
Delphi
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Visual Basic

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

Transact SQL, .NET languages, R, Python and (with SQL Server 2019) Java

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

Round robin

none

tables can be distributed across several files (horizontal partitioning); sharding through federation

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication

none

yes, but depending on the SQL-Server Edition

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

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

with automatic compression on writes

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

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.