DBMS > Apache Drill vs. Graph Engine vs. Machbase Neo vs. OpenEdge vs. SQLite

System Properties Comparison Apache Drill vs. Graph Engine vs. Machbase Neo vs. OpenEdge vs. SQLite

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

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

A distributed in-memory data processing engine, underpinned by a strongly-typed RAM store and a general distributed computation engine

TimeSeries DBMS for AIoT and BigData

Application development environment with integrated database management system

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

Primary database model

Document store
Relational DBMS

Graph DBMS
Key-value store

Time Series DBMS

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	0.61
Rank	#240	Overall
	#21	Graph DBMS
	#35	Key-value stores

Score	0.12
Rank	#339	Overall
	#30	Time Series DBMS

Score	3.51
Rank	#86	Overall
	#46	Relational DBMS

Score	114.32
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Website

drill.apache.org

www.graphengine.io

machbase.com

www.progress.com/openedge

www.sqlite.org

Technical documentation

drill.apache.org/docs

www.graphengine.io/docs/manual

machbase.com/dbms

documentation.progress.com/output/ua/OpenEdge_latest

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

Developer

Apache Software Foundation

Microsoft

Machbase

Progress Software Corporation

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Initial release

2012

2010

2013

1984

2000

Current release

1.20.3, January 2023

V8.0, August 2023

OpenEdge 12.2, March 2020

3.45.3 (15 April 2024), April 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache Version 2

Open Source

MIT License

commercial

free test version available

commercial

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

.NET and C

Server operating systems

Linux
OS X
Windows

.NET

Linux
macOS
Windows

AIX
HP-UX
Linux
Solaris
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.

yes

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL SELECT statement is SQL:2003 compliant

SQL-like query language

yes

close to SQL 92

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

RESTful HTTP API

gRPC
HTTP REST
JDBC
MQTT (Message Queue Telemetry Transport)
ODBC

JDBC
ODBC

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

Supported programming languages

C++

C#
C++
F#
Visual Basic

C
C#
C++
Go
Java
JavaScript
PHP

via ODBC
Python
R

via ODBC
Scala

Progress proprietary ABL (Advanced Business Language)

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

yes

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

horizontal partitioning

Sharding

horizontal partitioning

since Version 11.4

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

selectable replication factor

Source-replica replication

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

none

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

via file-system locks

Durability

Support for making data persistent

Depending on the underlying data source

optional: either by committing a write-ahead log (WAL) to the local persistent storage or by dumping the memory to a persistent storage

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

volatile and lookup table

yes

User concepts

Access control

Depending on the underlying data source

simple password-based access control

Users and groups

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.