DBMS > LevelDB vs. MySQL vs. Splice Machine vs. TempoIQ

System Properties Comparison LevelDB vs. MySQL vs. Splice Machine vs. TempoIQ

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

TempoIQ seems to be decommissioned. It will be removed from the DB-Engines ranking.

Description

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

Widely used open source RDBMS

Open-Source SQL RDBMS for Operational and Analytical use cases with native Machine Learning, powered by Hadoop and Spark

Scalable analytics DBMS for sensor data, provided as a service (SaaS)

Primary database model

Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Key/Value like access via memcached API

Relational DBMS

Time Series DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Spatial DBMS

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

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

Score	1083.74
Rank	#2	Overall
	#2	Relational DBMS

Score	0.54
Rank	#250	Overall
	#114	Relational DBMS

Website

github.com/google/leveldb

www.mysql.com

splicemachine.com

tempoiq.com (offline)

Technical documentation

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

dev.mysql.com/doc

splicemachine.com/how-it-works

Developer

Google

Oracle

since 2010, originally MySQL AB, then Sun

Splice Machine

TempoIQ

Initial release

2011

1995

2014

2012

Current release

1.23, February 2021

8.4.0, April 2024

3.1, March 2021

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

BSD

Open Source

GPL version 2. Commercial licenses with extended functionallity are available

Open Source

AGPL 3.0, commercial license available

commercial

Cloud-based only

Only available as a cloud service

yes

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++

C and C++

Java

Server operating systems

Illumos
Linux
OS X
Windows

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

Linux
OS X
Solaris
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.

yes

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

with proprietary extensions

yes

APIs and other access methods

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
Proprietary native API

JDBC
Native Spark Datasource
ODBC

HTTP API

Supported programming languages

C++
Go
Java

3rd party binding
JavaScript (Node.js)

3rd party binding
Python

3rd party binding

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

C#
C++
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python
R
Scala

C#
Java
JavaScript

Node.js
Python
Ruby

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

proprietary syntax

yes

Java

Triggers

yes

Realtime Alerts

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

horizontal partitioning, sharding with MySQL Cluster or MySQL Fabric

Shared Nothhing Auto-Sharding, Columnar Partitioning

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

Yes, via Full Spark Integration

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

not for MyISAM storage engine

yes

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, multi-version concurrency control (MVCC)

yes

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

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

no user groups or roles

Access rights for users, groups and roles according to SQL-standard

simple authentication-based access control

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.