DBMS > Apache Druid vs. Atos Standard Common Repository vs. H2GIS vs. OrigoDB vs. TinkerGraph

System Properties Comparison Apache Druid vs. Atos Standard Common Repository vs. H2GIS vs. OrigoDB vs. TinkerGraph

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

This system has been discontinued and will be removed from the DB-Engines ranking.

Description

Open-source analytics data store designed for sub-second OLAP queries on high dimensionality and high cardinality data

Highly scalable database system, designed for managing session and subscriber data in modern mobile communication networks

Spatial extension of H2

A fully ACID in-memory object graph database

A lightweight, in-memory graph engine that serves as a reference implementation of the TinkerPop3 API

Primary database model

Relational DBMS
Time Series DBMS

Document store
Key-value store

Spatial DBMS

Document store
Object oriented DBMS

Graph DBMS

Secondary database models

Relational DBMS

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

Score	3.29
Rank	#95	Overall
	#49	Relational DBMS
	#7	Time Series DBMS

Score	0.05
Rank	#372	Overall
	#7	Spatial DBMS

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

Score	0.12
Rank	#344	Overall
	#34	Graph DBMS

Website

druid.apache.org

atos.net/en/convergence-creators/portfolio/standard-common-repository

www.h2gis.org

origodb.com

tinkerpop.apache.org/docs/current/reference/#tinkergraph-gremlin

Technical documentation

druid.apache.org/docs/latest/design

www.h2gis.org/docs/home

origodb.com/docs

Developer

Apache Software Foundation and contributors

Atos Convergence Creators

CNRS

Robert Friberg et al

Initial release

2012

2016

2013

2009

under the name LiveDB

2009

Current release

29.0.1, April 2024

1703

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache license v2

commercial

Open Source

LGPL 3.0

Open Source

Apache 2.0

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

Server operating systems

Linux
OS X
Unix

Linux

Linux
Windows

Data scheme

yes

schema-less columns are supported

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

yes

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

optional

yes

User defined using .NET types and collections

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

can be achieved using .NET

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL for querying

yes

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
RESTful HTTP/JSON API

LDAP

.NET Client API
HTTP API
LINQ

TinkerPop 3

Supported programming languages

Clojure
JavaScript
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Scala

All languages with LDAP bindings

Java

.Net

Groovy
Java

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

based on H2

yes

Triggers

yes

Domain Events

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

manual/auto, time-based

Sharding

cell division

none

horizontal partitioning

client side managed; servers are not synchronized

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes, via HDFS, S3 or other storage engines

yes

based on H2

Source-replica replication

none

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

Immediate Consistency

none

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

depending on model

yes

Relationships in graphs

Transaction concepts

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

Atomic execution of specific operations

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

yes, multi-version concurrency control (MVCC)

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

Write ahead log

optional

In-memory capabilities

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

yes

User concepts

Access control

RBAC using LDAP or Druid internals for users and groups for read/write by datasource and system

LDAP bind authentication

yes

based on H2

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.

Related products and services

We invite representatives of vendors of related products to contact us for presenting information about their offerings here.

More resources

Recent citations in the news

'Lucifer' Botnet Turns Up the Heat on Apache Hadoop Servers
21 February 2024, Dark Reading

Apache Druid Wins Best Big Data Product in the 2023 BigDATAwire Readers' Choice Awards
26 January 2024, Datanami

New DDoS malware Attacking Apache big-data stack, Hadoop, & Druid Servers
26 February 2024, GBHackers

Imply Data gives Apache Druid schema auto-discover capability
6 June 2023, SiliconANGLE News

Imply Announces Automatic Schema Discovery for Apache Druid, Reinforcing Druid's Leadership for Real-Time ...
6 June 2023, Business Wire

provided by Google News

Automated testing of Amazon Neptune data access with Apache TinkerPop Gremlin | Amazon Web Services
28 September 2022, AWS Blog

Simple Deployment of a Graph Database: JanusGraph | by Edward Elson Kosasih
12 October 2020, Towards Data Science

Why developers like Apache TinkerPop, an open source framework for graph computing | Amazon Web Services
27 September 2021, AWS Blog

InfiniteGraph Gets Support for Common Graph Database Language and More
21 February 2012, SiliconANGLE News

Introducing Gremlin query hints for Amazon Neptune | AWS Database Blog
26 February 2019, AWS Blog

provided by Google News

Share this page