替代内存数据库中的TimesTen [英] Alternative to the TimesTen in memory database

问题描述

我刚找到有没有人发布
不同的
内存中的RDBMS之间的详细比较？这与我的问题有关
。

I just found "Has anyone published a detailed comparison between different in-memory RDBMSs?" that is related to my question.

TimesTen （请参阅 ）是来自oracle的内存数据库。

TimesTen (see also) is a In-Memory Database from oracle.

它包括很多功能。

• 高交易吞吐量


• 标准SQL，无需应用程序重写


• 高可用性且无数据丢失

• Fast, consistent response time
• High transaction throughput
• Standard SQL, no application rewrite
• Persistent and recoverable
• High availability and no data loss

但它的价格超出了大多数人href =https://shop.oracle.com/pls/ostore/product?p1=oracletimesteninmemorydatabase&sc=ocom_oracletimesteninmemorydatabase# =nofollow noreferrer> $ 41,500.00 /处理器）。

However it is priced out of the reach of most people ($41,500.00 / Processor).

因此，还有什么替代方案，有什么优点和缺点。

So what alternatives are there, and what are there pros and cons.

（我使用.NET如果更改你的答案）

(I am using .NET if it changes your answer)

推荐答案

流行的内存数据库系统是McObject的eXtremeDB，参见

A popular in-memory database system is McObject's eXtremeDB, see

http://www.mcobject.com/extremedbfamily.shtml

还有一个好的白皮书，可以从McObject的网站下载，名为内存数据库系统：神话和事实。它阐明了讨论技术时出现的一些问题，例如IMDS与传统数据库在RAM磁盘上的运行方式有什么不同？

There is also a good white paper, offered for download from the home page of McObject's Web site, called, "In-Memory Database Systems: Myths and Facts". It clarifies some questions that arise when discussing the technology, such as, "how is an IMDS different from a 'traditional' database running on a RAM disk?"

这篇关于替代内存数据库中的TimesTen的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！