DBMS > MySQL vs. RavenDB vs. SQream DB

System Properties Comparison MySQL vs. RavenDB vs. SQream DB

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Widely used open source RDBMS

Open Source Operational and Transactional Enterprise NoSQL Document Database

a GPU-based, columnar RDBMS for big data analytics workloads

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Key/Value like access via memcached API

Document store

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Spatial DBMS

Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS
Time Series DBMS

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

Score	1087.72
Rank	#2	Overall
	#2	Relational DBMS

Score	3.01
Rank	#101	Overall
	#17	Document stores

Score	0.73
Rank	#228	Overall
	#105	Relational DBMS

Website

www.mysql.com

ravendb.net

sqream.com

Technical documentation

dev.mysql.com/doc

ravendb.net/docs

docs.sqream.com

Developer

Oracle

since 2010, originally MySQL AB, then Sun

Hibernating Rhinos

SQream Technologies

Initial release

1995

2010

2017

Current release

8.3.0, January 2024

5.4, July 2022

2022.1.6, December 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

GPL version 2. Commercial licenses with extended functionallity are available

Open Source

AGPL version 3, commercial license 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 and C++

C++, CUDA, Haskell, Java, Scala

Server operating systems

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

Linux
macOS
Raspberry Pi
Windows

Linux

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

yes, ANSI Standard SQL Types

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

SQL-like query language (RQL)

yes

APIs and other access methods

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
Proprietary native 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

.Net
JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

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

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

C++
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

proprietary syntax

yes

user defined functions in Python

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

horizontal partitioning, sharding with MySQL Cluster or MySQL Fabric

Sharding

horizontal and vertical partitioning

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

Multi-source replication

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

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

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, Cluster-wide transaction available

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

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

Authorization levels configured per client per database

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.