DBMS > Amazon Aurora vs. EJDB vs. Infobright vs. TimesTen

System Properties Comparison Amazon Aurora vs. EJDB vs. Infobright vs. TimesTen

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

MySQL and PostgreSQL compatible cloud service by Amazon

Embeddable document-store database library with JSON representation of queries (in MongoDB style)

High performant column-oriented DBMS for analytic workloads using MySQL or PostgreSQL as a frontend

In-Memory RDBMS compatible to Oracle

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Document store

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store

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

Score	8.50
Rank	#49	Overall
	#31	Relational DBMS

Score	0.30
Rank	#294	Overall
	#44	Document stores

Score	1.00
Rank	#193	Overall
	#90	Relational DBMS

Score	1.35
Rank	#165	Overall
	#75	Relational DBMS

Website

aws.amazon.com/rds/aurora

github.com/Softmotions/ejdb

ignitetech.com/softwarelibrary/infobrightdb

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

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonRDS/latest/AuroraUserGuide/CHAP_Aurora.html

github.com/Softmotions/ejdb/blob/master/README.md

docs.oracle.com/database/timesten-18.1

Developer

Amazon

Softmotions

Ignite Technologies Inc.; formerly InfoBright Inc.

Oracle, TimesTen Performance Software, HP

originally founded in HP Labs it was acquired by Oracle in 2005

Initial release

2015

2012

2005

1998

Current release

11 Release 2 (11.2.2.8.0)

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

GPLv2

commercial

The open source (GPLv2) version did not support inserts/updates/deletes and was discontinued with July 2016

commercial

Cloud-based only

Only available as a cloud service

yes

DBaaS offerings (sponsored links)

Database as a Service

Providers of DBaaS offerings, please contact us to be listed.

Implementation language

Server operating systems

hosted

server-less

Linux
Windows

AIX
HP-UX
Linux
OS X
Solaris SPARC/x86
Windows

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

string, integer, double, bool, date, object_id

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

Secondary indexes

yes

Knowledge Grid Technology used instead

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

APIs and other access methods

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

in-process shared library

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

JDBC
ODBC
ODP.NET
Oracle Call Interface (OCI)

Supported programming languages

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

Actionscript
C
C#
C++
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Lua
Objective-C
Pike
Python
Ruby

.Net
C
C#
C++
D
Eiffel
Erlang
Haskell
Java
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scheme
Tcl

C
C++
Java
PL/SQL

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

PL/SQL

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

horizontal partitioning

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Source-replica replication

none

Source-replica replication

Multi-source 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

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

typically not needed, however similar functionality with collection joins possible

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Read/Write Locking

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

by means of logfiles and checkpoints

In-memory capabilities

Is there an option to define some or all structures to be held in-memory only.

yes

User concepts

Access control

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

exploiting MySQL or PostgreSQL frontend capabilities

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

Cloud-based DBMS's popularity grows at high rates
12 December 2019, Paul Andlinger

The popularity of cloud-based DBMSs has increased tenfold in four years
7 February 2017, Matthias Gelbmann

Amazon - the rising star in the DBMS market
3 August 2015, Matthias Gelbmann

show all

Recent citations in the news

Handle tables without primary keys while creating Amazon Aurora PostgreSQL zero-ETL integrations with Amazon ...
18 April 2024, AWS Blog

University of Nebraska-Omaha's ITD Lab migrates to Amazon Aurora with Babelfish, reducing database costs | Amazon ...
8 April 2024, AWS Blog

Join the preview of Amazon Aurora Limitless Database | Amazon Web Services
27 November 2023, AWS Blog

How RocketReach stabilized Amazon Aurora costs and improved performance with Amazon Aurora I/O-Optimized ...
2 April 2024, AWS Blog

New – Amazon Aurora Optimized Reads for Aurora PostgreSQL with up to 8x query latency improvement for I/O ...
8 November 2023, AWS Blog

provided by Google News

In-memory databases with Emulex Gen 7
25 October 2023, Broadcom Inc.

provided by Google News

Share this page