DBMS > OpenQM vs. RavenDB vs. SQL.JS vs. SQLite

System Properties Comparison OpenQM vs. RavenDB vs. SQL.JS vs. SQLite

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

QpenQM is a high-performance, self-tuning, multi-value DBMS

Open Source Operational and Transactional Enterprise NoSQL Document Database

Port of SQLite to JavaScript

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

Primary database model

Multivalue DBMS

Document store

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS
Time Series DBMS

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

Score	0.34
Rank	#284	Overall
	#10	Multivalue DBMS

Score	2.84
Rank	#101	Overall
	#18	Document stores

Score	0.63
Rank	#241	Overall
	#112	Relational DBMS

Score	111.41
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Website

www.rocketsoftware.com/products/rocket-multivalue-application-development-platform/rocket-open-qm

ravendb.net

sql.js.org

www.sqlite.org

Technical documentation

ravendb.net/docs

sql.js.org/documentation/index.html

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

Developer

Rocket Software, originally Martin Phillips

Hibernating Rhinos

Alon Zakai

enhancements implemented by others

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Initial release

1993

2010

2012

2000

Current release

3.4-12

5.4, July 2022

3.46.0 (23 May 2024), May 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

GPLv2, extended commercial license available

Open Source

AGPL version 3, commercial license 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

JavaScript

Server operating systems

AIX
FreeBSD
Linux
macOS
Raspberry Pi
Solaris
Windows

Linux
macOS
Raspberry Pi
Windows

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

server-less

Data scheme

yes

with some exceptions

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

SQL-like query language (RQL)

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

APIs and other access methods

.NET Client API
F# Client API
Go Client API
Java Client API
NodeJS Client API
PHP Client API
Python Client API
RESTful HTTP API

JavaScript API

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

Supported programming languages

.Net
Basic
C
Java
Objective C
PHP
Python

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

JavaScript

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

yes

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

yes

Sharding

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

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.

none

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

ACID, Cluster-wide transaction available

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

via file-system locks

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

except by serializing a db to a file

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

Access rights can be defined down to the item level

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.