Question

I found a lot of comparisions here, but not this one; So, what is best in each one?

Was it helpful?

Solution

There's a full comparison at SQLite's site.

SQLite is much more restricted, as it only supports a small subset of SQL92, whereas Derby (now JavaDB) has full support of SQL92 and SQL99.

OTHER TIPS

I execute a complex SQL which has more than 6000 rows 10000 times in my Websphere Server. Total net execution times are like that:

          Derby (In Memory)   Oracle(standard DB) SQLite (In Memory)  HSQLDb (In Memory)
          nano sec.  second    nano sec.  second  nano sec.  second   nano sec. second
1. try    58000000    0,058   6149976000   6,1    1141988000   1,14   999403000    1,00
2. try    78560000    0,078   5268477000   5,2    1182621000   1,18   1338705000   1,34
3. try    58849000    0,058   5200898000   5,2    1133003000   1,13   2239527000   2,24
4. try    60901000    0,06    5435216000   5,4    1205442000   1,21   1370711000   1,37
5. try    58798000    0,058   6501929000   6,5    1186734000   1,19   1001800000   1,00
6. try    62928000    0,062   5913053000   5,9    1224470000   1,22   1066736000   1,07
7. try    71171000    0,071   5111207000   5,1    1200769000   1,20   1304524000   1,30
8. try    66913000    0,066   5517989000   5,5    1173495000   1,17   1299230000   1,30
9. try    58777000    0,058   7209555000   7,2    1179013000   1,18   1031795000   1,03
10. try   75299000    0,075   5356514000   5,3    1182715000   1,18   1368461000   1,37
average   65019600    0,064   5766481400   5,7    1181025000   1,18   1302089200   1,30

I obviously compare Derby, SQLite and HSQLDB. Oracle isn't a in memory db. But I put it's result to table because to show speed difference between a in memory db and normal db.

PS: In SQLite and HSQLDB results aren't stable. So I choosed 10 stable results in 100 tries. Sometimes HSQLDB is faster than SQLite. I think theirs performance are same.

Licensed under: CC-BY-SA with attribution
Not affiliated with StackOverflow
scroll top