DBMS > 4D vs. Citus vs. Hazelcast vs. Transbase

System Properties Comparison 4D vs. Citus vs. Hazelcast vs. Transbase

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Application development environment with integrated database management system

Scalable hybrid operational and analytics RDBMS for big data use cases based on PostgreSQL

A widely adopted in-memory data grid

A resource-optimized, high-performance, universally applicable RDBMS

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store

JSON support with IMDG 3.12

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

Score	2.47
Rank	#110	Overall
	#54	Relational DBMS

Score	2.15
Rank	#117	Overall
	#56	Relational DBMS

Score	5.46
Rank	#61	Overall
	#7	Key-value stores

Score	0.17
Rank	#334	Overall
	#148	Relational DBMS

Website

www.4d.com

www.citusdata.com

hazelcast.com

www.transaction.de/en/products/transbase.html

Technical documentation

developer.4d.com

docs.citusdata.com

hazelcast.org/imdg/docs

www.transaction.de/en/products/transbase/features.html

Developer

4D, Inc

Hazelcast

Transaction Software GmbH

Initial release

1984

2010

2008

1987

Current release

v20, April 2023

8.1, December 2018

5.3.6, November 2023

Transbase 8.3, 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

AGPL, commercial license also available

Open Source

Apache Version 2; commercial licenses available

commercial

free development license

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

Java

C and C++

Server operating systems

OS X
Windows

Linux

All OS with a Java VM

FreeBSD
Linux
macOS
Solaris
Windows

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

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.

yes

specific XML type available, but no XML query functionality

yes

the object must implement a serialization strategy

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

close to SQL 92

yes

standard, with numerous extensions

SQL-like query language

yes

APIs and other access methods

ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

by using 4D Mobile
SOAP webservices

ADO.NET
JDBC
native C library
ODBC
streaming API for large objects

JCache
JPA
Memcached protocol
RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
Proprietary native API

Supported programming languages

4D proprietary IDE
PHP

.Net
C
C++
Delphi
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Perl
PHP
Python
Tcl

.Net
C#
C++
Clojure
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python
Scala

C
C#
C++
Java
JavaScript
Kotlin
Objective-C
PHP
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

user defined functions

realized in proprietary language PL/pgSQL or with common languages like Perl, Python, Tcl etc.

yes

Event Listeners, Executor Services

yes

Triggers

yes

Events

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication

Source-replica replication

other methods possible by using 3rd party extensions

yes

Replicated Map

Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency selectable by user

Raft Consensus Algorithm

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

one or two-phase-commit; repeatable reads; read commited

yes

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

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

User concepts

Access control

Users and groups

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Role-based access control

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

DB-Engines blog posts

MySQL, PostgreSQL and Redis are the winners of the March ranking
2 March 2016, Paul Andlinger

show all

Recent citations in the news

Ubicloud wants to build an open source alternative to AWS
5 March 2024, TechCrunch

Microsoft acquires Citus Data, re-affirming its commitment to Open Source and accelerating Azure PostgreSQL ...
24 January 2019, Microsoft

Ubicloud reels in $16M for its open-source cloud platform
5 March 2024, SiliconANGLE News

Distributed PostgreSQL Benchmarks: Azure Cosmos DB, CockroachDB, and YugabyteDB
8 July 2023, InfoQ.com

Microsoft Benchmarks Distributed PostgreSQL DBs
10 July 2023, Datanami

provided by Google News

Hazelcast Weaves Wider Logic Threads Through The Data Fabric
7 March 2024, Forbes

Hazelcast 5.4 real time data processing platform boosts AI and consistency
17 April 2024, VentureBeat

Hazelcast appoints Anthony Griffin as Chief Architect -
11 June 2024, Enterprise Times

Hazelcast Showcases Real-Time Data Platform at 2024 Gartner Summit
15 May 2024, Datanami

Hazelcast Versus Redis: A Practical Comparison
4 January 2024, Database Trends and Applications

provided by Google News

Share this page