DBMS > Apache IoTDB vs. Drizzle vs. EJDB vs. mSQL vs. OrigoDB

System Properties Comparison Apache IoTDB vs. Drizzle vs. EJDB vs. mSQL vs. OrigoDB

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Drizzle has published its last release in September 2012. The open-source project is discontinued and Drizzle is excluded from the DB-Engines ranking.

Description

An IoT native database with high performance for data management and analysis, deployable on the edge and the cloud and integrated with Hadoop, Spark and Flink

MySQL fork with a pluggable micro-kernel and with an emphasis of performance over compatibility.

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

mSQL (Mini SQL) is a simple and lightweight RDBMS

A fully ACID in-memory object graph database

Primary database model

Document store
Object oriented DBMS

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

Score	1.18
Rank	#173	Overall
	#15	Time Series DBMS

Score	0.27
Rank	#297	Overall
	#44	Document stores

Score	1.27
Rank	#167	Overall
	#77	Relational DBMS

Score	0.00
Rank	#383	Overall
	#53	Document stores
	#20	Object oriented DBMS

Website

iotdb.apache.org

github.com/Softmotions/ejdb

hughestech.com.au/products/msql

origodb.com

Technical documentation

iotdb.apache.org/UserGuide/Master/QuickStart/QuickStart.html

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

origodb.com/docs

Developer

Apache Software Foundation

Drizzle project, originally started by Brian Aker

Softmotions

Hughes Technologies

Robert Friberg et al

Initial release

2018

2008

2012

1994

2009

under the name LiveDB

Current release

1.1.0, April 2023

7.2.4, September 2012

4.4, October 2021

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

Open Source

GNU GPL

Open Source

GPLv2

commercial

free licenses can be provided

Open Source

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

C++

Server operating systems

All OS with a Java VM (>= 1.8)

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X

server-less

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

Linux
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

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.

can be achieved using .NET

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language

yes

with proprietary extensions

A subset of ANSI SQL is implemented

no subqueries, aggregate functions, views, foreign keys, triggers

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
Native API

JDBC

in-process shared library

JDBC
ODBC

.NET Client API
HTTP API
LINQ

Supported programming languages

C
C#
C++
Go
Java
Python
Scala

C
C++
Java
PHP

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

C
C++
Delphi
Java
Perl
PHP
Tcl

.Net

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Triggers

yes

hooks for callbacks inside the server can be used.

yes

Domain Events

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

horizontal partitioning (by time range) + vertical partitioning (by deviceId)

Sharding

none

horizontal partitioning

client side managed; servers are not synchronized

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

selectable replication methods; using Raft/IoTConsensus algorithm to ensure strong/eventual data consistency among multiple replicas

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

none

Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Integration with Hadoop and Spark

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Eventual Consistency
Strong Consistency with Raft

none

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

typically not needed, however similar functionality with collection joins possible

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

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

yes

Pluggable authentication mechanisms

e.g. LDAP, HTTP

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

DB-Engines blog posts

MySQL won the April ranking; did its forks follow?
1 April 2015, Paul Andlinger

Has MySQL finally lost its mojo?
1 July 2013, Matthias Gelbmann

show all

Recent citations in the news

TsFile: A Standard Format for IoT Time Series Data
27 February 2024, The New Stack

Linux 6.5 With AMD P-State EPP Default Brings Performance & Power Efficiency Benefits For Ryzen Servers
21 September 2023, Phoronix

AMD EPYC 8324P / 8324PN Siena 32-Core Siena Linux Server Performance Review
10 October 2023, Phoronix

Apache Promotes IoT Database Project
25 September 2020, Datanami

IoTDB Provides Data Management for Industrial Edge IT
15 October 2020, The New Stack

provided by Google News

Make Your MySQL Server More Secure With These 7 Steps - MUO
1 December 2022, MakeUseOf

Writing a Web Service in Perl
9 July 2003, PCQuest

Higher Education PS rules out ghost students before PAC - Zambia
29 November 2018, diggers.news

provided by Google News

Share this page