DBMS > Oracle Rdb vs. Sequoiadb vs. Tkrzw vs. Vitess vs. Yaacomo

System Properties Comparison Oracle Rdb vs. Sequoiadb vs. Tkrzw vs. Vitess vs. Yaacomo

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Yaacomo seems to be discontinued and is removed from the DB-Engines ranking

Description

NewSQL database with distributed OLTP and SQL

A concept of libraries, allowing an application program to store and query key-value pairs in a file. Successor of Tokyo Cabinet and Kyoto Cabinet

Scalable, distributed, cloud-native DBMS, extending MySQL

OpenCL based in-memory RDBMS, designed for efficiently utilizing the hardware via parallel computing

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Document store
Relational DBMS

Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	1.14
Rank	#178	Overall
	#80	Relational DBMS

Score	0.50
Rank	#258	Overall
	#41	Document stores
	#120	Relational DBMS

Score	0.07
Rank	#372	Overall
	#57	Key-value stores

Score	0.88
Rank	#203	Overall
	#95	Relational DBMS

Website

www.oracle.com/database/technologies/related/rdb.html

www.sequoiadb.com

dbmx.net/tkrzw

vitess.io

yaacomo.com

Technical documentation

www.oracle.com/database/technologies/related/rdb-doc.html

www.sequoiadb.com/en/index.php?m=Files&a=index

vitess.io/docs

Developer

Oracle, originally developed by Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC)

Sequoiadb Ltd.

Mikio Hirabayashi

The Linux Foundation, PlanetScale

Q2WEB GmbH

Initial release

1984

2013

2020

2013

2009

Current release

7.4.1.1, 2021

0.9.3, August 2020

15.0.2, December 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Server: AGPL; Client: Apache V2

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0, commercial licenses 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.

Implementation language

C++

Server operating systems

HP Open VMS

Linux

Linux
macOS

Docker
Linux
macOS

Android
Linux
Windows

Data scheme

Flexible Schema (defined schema, partial schema, schema free)

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

oid, date, timestamp, binary, regex

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.

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

SQL-like query language

yes

with proprietary extensions

yes

APIs and other access methods

proprietary protocol using JSON

ADO.NET
JDBC
MySQL protocol
ODBC

JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

.Net
C++
Java
PHP
Python

C++
Java
Python
Ruby

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

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

JavaScript

yes

proprietary syntax

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

none

Sharding

horizontal partitioning

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Source-replica replication

none

Multi-source replication
Source-replica 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

Eventual Consistency

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency across shards
Immediate Consistency within a shard

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

yes, on a single node

Document is locked during a transaction

ACID at shard level

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

using specific database classes

yes

User concepts

Access control

simple password-based access control

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

no user groups or roles

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.

Related products and services

We invite representatives of vendors of related products to contact us for presenting information about their offerings here.

More resources

Recent citations in the news

Oracle Adds New AI-Enabling Features To MySQL HeatWave
23 March 2023, Forbes

Should we all consolidate databases for the storage benefits? Reg vultures deploy DevOps, zoos, haircuts
18 September 2020, The Register

2013 Data Science Salary Survey – O'Reilly
4 May 2013, O'Reilly Media

provided by Google News

PlanetScale Unveils Distributed MySQL Database Service Based on Vitess
18 May 2021, Datanami

PlanetScale grabs YouTube-developed open-source tech, promises Vitess DBaaS with on-the-fly schema changes
18 May 2021, The Register

They scaled YouTube -- now they’ll shard everyone with PlanetScale
13 December 2018, TechCrunch

With Vitess 4.0, database vendor matures cloud-native platform
13 November 2019, TechTarget

Massively Scaling MySQL Using Vitess
19 February 2019, InfoQ.com

provided by Google News

Share this page