DBMS > Axibase vs. DuckDB vs. EJDB vs. Graph Engine vs. Heroic

System Properties Comparison Axibase vs. DuckDB vs. EJDB vs. Graph Engine vs. Heroic

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Scalable TimeSeries DBMS based on HBase with integrated rule engine and visualization

An embeddable, in-process, column-oriented SQL OLAP RDBMS

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

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

Time Series DBMS built at Spotify based on Cassandra or Google Cloud Bigtable, and ElasticSearch

Primary database model

Time Series DBMS

Relational DBMS

Document store

Graph DBMS
Key-value store

Time Series DBMS

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

Score	0.35
Rank	#282	Overall
	#25	Time Series DBMS

Score	4.63
Rank	#69	Overall
	#37	Relational DBMS

Score	0.31
Rank	#296	Overall
	#44	Document stores

Score	0.67
Rank	#232	Overall
	#21	Graph DBMS
	#34	Key-value stores

Score	0.46
Rank	#265	Overall
	#22	Time Series DBMS

Website

axibase.com/docs/atsd/finance

duckdb.org

github.com/Softmotions/ejdb

www.graphengine.io

github.com/spotify/heroic

Technical documentation

duckdb.org/docs

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

www.graphengine.io/docs/manual

spotify.github.io/heroic

Developer

Axibase Corporation

Softmotions

Microsoft

Spotify

Initial release

2013

2018

2012

2010

2014

Current release

15585

1.0.0, June 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Community Edition (single node) is free, Enterprise Edition (distributed) is paid

Open Source

MIT License

Open Source

GPLv2

Open Source

MIT License

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

C++

.NET and C

Java

Server operating systems

Linux

server-less

.NET

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

yes

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

short, integer, long, float, double, decimal, string

yes

string, integer, double, bool, date, object_id

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.

Secondary indexes

yes

via Elasticsearch

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language

yes

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
Proprietary protocol (Network API)
RESTful HTTP API

Arrow Database Connectivity (ADBC)
CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

in-process shared library

RESTful HTTP API

HQL (Heroic Query Language, a JSON-based language)
HTTP API

Supported programming languages

Go
Java
PHP
Python
R
Ruby

C
C#

3rd party driver
C++
Crystal

3rd party driver
Go

3rd party driver
Java
Lisp

3rd party driver
Python
R
Ruby

3rd party driver
Rust
Swift
Zig

3rd party driver

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

C#
C++
F#
Visual Basic

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

none

horizontal partitioning

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Source-replica replication

none

yes

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

typically not needed, however similar functionality with collection joins possible

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

yes, multi-version concurrency control (MVCC)

yes

Read/Write Locking

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

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.

yes

User concepts

Access control

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

The Ultimate ATV Test: Suzuki's King Quad 750 AXI Rugged Package vs. Alaska's Hunting Season
14 October 2020, Outdoor Life

Time Series Databases Software Market - A comprehensive study by Key Players | Warp 10, Amazon Timestream ...
6 February 2020, openPR

provided by Google News

MotherDuck Announces General Availability; Brings Simplicity and Power of DuckDB in a Serverless Data Warehouse
11 June 2024, PR Newswire

DuckDB: The tiny but powerful analytics database
15 May 2024, InfoWorld

DuckDB promises greater stability with 1.0 release
5 June 2024, The Register

DuckDB: In-Process Python Analytics for Not-Quite-Big Data
31 May 2024, The New Stack

DuckDB Walks to the Beat of Its Own Analytics Drum
5 March 2024, Datanami

provided by Google News

Trinity
30 October 2010, Microsoft

Open source Microsoft Graph Engine takes on Neo4j
13 February 2017, InfoWorld

IBM releases Graph, a service that can outperform SQL databases
27 July 2016, GeekWire

Aerospike Is Now a Graph Database, Too
21 June 2023, Datanami

The graph analytics landscape 2019 - DataScienceCentral.com
27 February 2019, Data Science Central

provided by Google News

Review: Google Bigtable scales with ease
7 September 2016, InfoWorld

provided by Google News

Share this page