Kyoto Tycoon vs Memcached

Overview

Memcached

Stacks7.9K

Followers5.7K

Votes473

GitHub Stars14.0K

Forks3.3K

Kyoto Tycoon

Stacks3

Followers17

Votes5

Kyoto Tycoon vs Memcached: What are the differences?

Storage Mechanism: One key difference between Kyoto Tycoon and Memcached is the storage mechanism they employ. Kyoto Tycoon utilizes a disk-based storage mechanism, allowing for persistent data storage even after server restarts. On the other hand, Memcached uses an in-memory caching system, which means data is lost upon server restarts.
Replication and Clustering: Kyoto Tycoon offers built-in support for replication and clustering, making it easier to scale and ensure high availability across multiple machines. In contrast, Memcached does not natively support replication or clustering, requiring additional tools and configurations to achieve the same level of scalability and fault tolerance.
Query Language Support: While Kyoto Tycoon supports the use of a custom query language for data retrieval and manipulation, Memcached does not have built-in support for querying data. This means that Kyoto Tycoon allows for more complex operations to be performed directly on the data store, providing greater flexibility in application development.
Data Persistence: Another key difference is in data persistence capabilities. Kyoto Tycoon offers disk-based persistence, enabling data to survive server reboots and failures. In contrast, Memcached solely relies on in-memory storage, which means data can be lost in the event of unexpected shutdowns unless external mechanisms like cache dumping are implemented.
Built-in Data Structures: Kyoto Tycoon provides support for various built-in data structures such as key-value stores, hash tables, and ordered maps, offering more versatility in data storage and retrieval. In comparison, Memcached primarily focuses on caching key-value pairs, limiting its use cases to simple data caching operations without the support for complex data structures.
Implementation Language: Kyoto Tycoon is implemented in C++ and Tokyo Cabinet, providing efficient performance and reliability. In contrast, Memcached is implemented in C, which may require additional effort for integration with applications written in different programming languages.

In Summary, Kyoto Tycoon and Memcached differ in storage mechanism, replication support, query language, data persistence, built-in data structures, and implementation language.

Share your Stack

Help developers discover the tools you use. Get visibility for your team's tech choices and contribute to the community's knowledge.

View Docs

CLI (Node.js)

Manual

Detailed Comparison

Memcached	Kyoto Tycoon
Memcached is an in-memory key-value store for small chunks of arbitrary data (strings, objects) from results of database calls, API calls, or page rendering.	Kyoto Tycoon is a lightweight database server with auto expiration mechanism, which is useful to handle cache data and persistent data of various applications. Kyoto Tycoon is also a package of network interface to the DBM called Kyoto Cabinet.
Statistics
GitHub Stars 14.0K	GitHub Stars -
GitHub Forks 3.3K	GitHub Forks -
Stacks 7.9K	Stacks 3
Followers 5.7K	Followers 17
Votes 473	Votes 5
Pros & Cons
Pros 139 Fast object cache 129 High-performance 91 Stable 65 Mature 33 Distributed caching system Cons 2 Only caches simple types	Pros 2 Simple, persistent Key-Value Store 2 RESTful API 1 Easy setup

What are some alternatives to Memcached, Kyoto Tycoon?

MongoDB

MongoDB stores data in JSON-like documents that can vary in structure, offering a dynamic, flexible schema. MongoDB was also designed for high availability and scalability, with built-in replication and auto-sharding.

MySQL

The MySQL software delivers a very fast, multi-threaded, multi-user, and robust SQL (Structured Query Language) database server. MySQL Server is intended for mission-critical, heavy-load production systems as well as for embedding into mass-deployed software.

PostgreSQL

PostgreSQL is an advanced object-relational database management system that supports an extended subset of the SQL standard, including transactions, foreign keys, subqueries, triggers, user-defined types and functions.

Microsoft SQL Server

Microsoft® SQL Server is a database management and analysis system for e-commerce, line-of-business, and data warehousing solutions.

SQLite

SQLite is an embedded SQL database engine. Unlike most other SQL databases, SQLite does not have a separate server process. SQLite reads and writes directly to ordinary disk files. A complete SQL database with multiple tables, indices, triggers, and views, is contained in a single disk file.

Cassandra

Partitioning means that Cassandra can distribute your data across multiple machines in an application-transparent matter. Cassandra will automatically repartition as machines are added and removed from the cluster. Row store means that like relational databases, Cassandra organizes data by rows and columns. The Cassandra Query Language (CQL) is a close relative of SQL.

MariaDB

Started by core members of the original MySQL team, MariaDB actively works with outside developers to deliver the most featureful, stable, and sanely licensed open SQL server in the industry. MariaDB is designed as a drop-in replacement of MySQL(R) with more features, new storage engines, fewer bugs, and better performance.

RethinkDB

RethinkDB is built to store JSON documents, and scale to multiple machines with very little effort. It has a pleasant query language that supports really useful queries like table joins and group by, and is easy to setup and learn.

ArangoDB

A distributed free and open-source database with a flexible data model for documents, graphs, and key-values. Build high performance applications using a convenient SQL-like query language or JavaScript extensions.

InfluxDB

InfluxDB is a scalable datastore for metrics, events, and real-time analytics. It has a built-in HTTP API so you don't have to write any server side code to get up and running. InfluxDB is designed to be scalable, simple to install and manage, and fast to get data in and out.

Related Comparisons

Kyoto Tycoon vs Memcached: What are the differences?

Storage Mechanism: One key difference between Kyoto Tycoon and Memcached is the storage mechanism they employ. Kyoto Tycoon utilizes a disk-based storage mechanism, allowing for persistent data storage even after server restarts. On the other hand, Memcached uses an in-memory caching system, which means data is lost upon server restarts.
Replication and Clustering: Kyoto Tycoon offers built-in support for replication and clustering, making it easier to scale and ensure high availability across multiple machines. In contrast, Memcached does not natively support replication or clustering, requiring additional tools and configurations to achieve the same level of scalability and fault tolerance.
Query Language Support: While Kyoto Tycoon supports the use of a custom query language for data retrieval and manipulation, Memcached does not have built-in support for querying data. This means that Kyoto Tycoon allows for more complex operations to be performed directly on the data store, providing greater flexibility in application development.
Data Persistence: Another key difference is in data persistence capabilities. Kyoto Tycoon offers disk-based persistence, enabling data to survive server reboots and failures. In contrast, Memcached solely relies on in-memory storage, which means data can be lost in the event of unexpected shutdowns unless external mechanisms like cache dumping are implemented.
Built-in Data Structures: Kyoto Tycoon provides support for various built-in data structures such as key-value stores, hash tables, and ordered maps, offering more versatility in data storage and retrieval. In comparison, Memcached primarily focuses on caching key-value pairs, limiting its use cases to simple data caching operations without the support for complex data structures.
Implementation Language: Kyoto Tycoon is implemented in C++ and Tokyo Cabinet, providing efficient performance and reliability. In contrast, Memcached is implemented in C, which may require additional effort for integration with applications written in different programming languages.

In Summary, Kyoto Tycoon and Memcached differ in storage mechanism, replication support, query language, data persistence, built-in data structures, and implementation language.

Kyoto Tycoon vs Memcached

Overview