DBMS > Apache Drill vs. BigObject vs. GeoMesa vs. Realm vs. SQLite

System Properties Comparison Apache Drill vs. BigObject vs. GeoMesa vs. Realm vs. SQLite

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Schema-free SQL Query Engine for Hadoop, NoSQL and Cloud Storage

Analytic DBMS for real-time computations and queries

GeoMesa is a distributed spatio-temporal DBMS based on various systems as storage layer.

A DBMS built for use on mobile devices that’s a fast, easy to use alternative to SQLite and Core Data

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

Primary database model

Document store
Relational DBMS

Relational DBMS

a hierachical model (tree) can be imposed

Spatial DBMS

Document store

Relational DBMS

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

Score	1.95
Rank	#127	Overall
	#23	Document stores
	#60	Relational DBMS

Score	0.13
Rank	#333	Overall
	#147	Relational DBMS

Score	0.78
Rank	#213	Overall
	#4	Spatial DBMS

Score	7.60
Rank	#52	Overall
	#9	Document stores

Score	114.32
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Website

Technical documentation

drill.apache.org/docs

docs.bigobject.io

www.geomesa.org/documentation/stable/user/index.html

realm.io/docs

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

Developer

Apache Software Foundation

BigObject, Inc.

CCRi and others

Realm, acquired by MongoDB in May 2019

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Initial release

2012

2015

2014

2000

Current release

1.20.3, January 2023

4.0.5, February 2024

3.45.3 (15 April 2024), April 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache Version 2

commercial

free community edition available

Open Source

Apache License 2.0

Open Source

Public Domain

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

Scala

Server operating systems

Linux
OS X
Windows

Linux

distributed as a docker-image
OS X

distributed as a docker-image (boot2docker)
Windows

distributed as a docker-image (boot2docker)

Android
Backend: server-less
iOS
Windows

server-less

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

dynamic column types

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

not rigid because of 'dynamic typing' concept.

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.

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL SELECT statement is SQL:2003 compliant

SQL-like DML and DDL statements

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

fluentd
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

Supported programming languages

C++

.Net
Java

with Android only
Objective-C
React Native
Swift

Actionscript
Ada
Basic
C
C#
C++
D
Delphi
Forth
Fortran
Haskell
Java
JavaScript
Lisp
Lua
MatLab
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
PL/SQL
Python
R
Ruby
Scala
Scheme
Smalltalk
Tcl

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

Lua

runs within the applications so server-side scripts are unnecessary

Triggers

yes

Change Listeners

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

none

depending on storage layer

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

depending on storage layer

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

none

depending on storage layer

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

automatically between fact table and dimension tables

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 lock on objects (tables, trees)

yes

via file-system locks

Durability

Support for making data persistent

Depending on the underlying data source

yes

In-memory capabilities

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

Depending on the underlying data source

yes

depending on storage layer

yes

In-Memory realm

yes

User concepts

Access control

Depending on the underlying data source

yes

depending on the DBMS used for storage

yes

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.