DBMS > Memcached vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. SQLite vs. Tibero

System Properties Comparison Memcached vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. SQLite vs. Tibero

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

In-memory key-value store, originally intended for caching

A Wide Column Store for rapid development using massive semi-structured datasets

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

A secure RDBMS, designed for easy portability from Oracle

Primary database model

Key-value store

Wide column store

Relational DBMS

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

Score	19.42
Rank	#32	Overall
	#4	Key-value stores

Score	4.48
Rank	#75	Overall
	#6	Wide column stores

Score	114.32
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Score	1.78
Rank	#140	Overall
	#64	Relational DBMS

Website

www.memcached.org

azure.microsoft.com/en-us/services/storage/tables

www.sqlite.org

us.tmaxsoft.com/products/tibero

Technical documentation

github.com/memcached/memcached/wiki

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

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

Developer

Danga Interactive

originally developed by Brad Fitzpatrick for LiveJournal

Microsoft

Dwayne Richard Hipp

TmaxSoft

Initial release

2003

2012

2000

2003

Current release

1.6.25, March 2024

3.45.3 (15 April 2024), April 2024

6, April 2015

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

BSD license

commercial

Open Source

Public Domain

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.

Implementation language

C and Assembler

Server operating systems

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X
Unix
Windows

hosted

server-less

AIX
HP-UX
Linux
Solaris
Windows

Data scheme

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

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

yes

APIs and other access methods

Proprietary protocol

RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

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

Supported programming languages

.Net
C
C++
ColdFusion
Erlang
Java
Lisp
Lua
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby

.Net
C#
C++
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
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

Persistent Stored Procedure (PSM)

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

none

horizontal partitioning

by range, hash, list or composite

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

Repcached, a Memcached patch, provides this functionallity

yes

implicit feature of the cloud service. Replication either local, cross-facility or geo-redundant.

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

Transaction concepts

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

optimistic locking

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

planned for next version

User concepts

Access control

yes

using SASL (Simple Authentication and Security Layer) protocol

Access rights based on private key authentication or shared access signatures

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.