DBMS > Amazon Neptune vs. EJDB vs. Microsoft SQL Server vs. OrigoDB

System Properties Comparison Amazon Neptune vs. EJDB vs. Microsoft SQL Server vs. OrigoDB

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Fast, reliable graph database built for the cloud

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

Microsofts flagship relational DBMS

A fully ACID in-memory object graph database

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
RDF store

Document store

Relational DBMS

Document store
Object oriented DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	2.58
Rank	#112	Overall
	#9	Graph DBMS
	#5	RDF stores

Score	0.30
Rank	#294	Overall
	#44	Document stores

Score	829.80
Rank	#3	Overall
	#3	Relational DBMS

Score	0.03
Rank	#378	Overall
	#51	Document stores
	#18	Object oriented DBMS

Website

aws.amazon.com/neptune

github.com/Softmotions/ejdb

www.microsoft.com/en-us/sql-server

origodb.com

Technical documentation

aws.amazon.com/neptune/developer-resources

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

learn.microsoft.com/en-US/sql/sql-server

origodb.com/docs

Developer

Amazon

Softmotions

Microsoft

Robert Friberg et al

Initial release

2017

2012

1989

2009

under the name LiveDB

Current release

SQL Server 2022, November 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

GPLv2

commercial

restricted free version is available

Open Source

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

C++

Server operating systems

hosted

server-less

Linux
Windows

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

string, integer, double, bool, date, object_id

yes

User defined using .NET types and collections

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

can be achieved using .NET

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

APIs and other access methods

OpenCypher
RDF 1.1 / SPARQL 1.1
TinkerPop Gremlin

in-process shared library

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
OLE DB
Tabular Data Stream (TDS)

.NET Client API
HTTP API
LINQ

Supported programming languages

C#
Go
Java
JavaScript
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scala

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

C#
C++
Delphi
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Visual Basic

.Net

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Transact SQL, .NET languages, R, Python and (with SQL Server 2019) Java

yes

Triggers

yes

Domain Events

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

tables can be distributed across several files (horizontal partitioning); sharding through federation

horizontal partitioning

client side managed; servers are not synchronized

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-availability zones high availability, asynchronous replication for up to 15 read replicas within a single region. Global database clusters consists of a primary write DB cluster in one region, and up to five secondary read DB clusters in different regions. Each secondary region can have up to 16 reader instances.

none

yes, but depending on the SQL-Server Edition

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

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Relationships in graphs

typically not needed, however similar functionality with collection joins possible

yes

depending on model

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

with encyption-at-rest

yes

Write ahead log

In-memory capabilities

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

yes

User concepts

Access control

Access rights for users and roles can be defined via the AWS Identity and Access Management (IAM)

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Role based authorization

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.