DBMS > Axibase vs. Graph Engine vs. RavenDB vs. TempoIQ vs. Transwarp Hippo

System Properties Comparison Axibase vs. Graph Engine vs. RavenDB vs. TempoIQ vs. Transwarp Hippo

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

TempoIQ seems to be decommissioned. It will be removed from the DB-Engines ranking.

Description

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

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

Open Source Operational and Transactional Enterprise NoSQL Document Database

Scalable analytics DBMS for sensor data, provided as a service (SaaS)

Cloud-native distributed Vector DBMS that supports storage, retrieval, and management of massive vector-based datasets

Primary database model

Time Series DBMS

Graph DBMS
Key-value store

Document store

Time Series DBMS

Vector DBMS

Secondary database models

Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS
Time Series DBMS

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

Score	0.29
Rank	#292	Overall
	#25	Time Series DBMS

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

Score	2.92
Rank	#101	Overall
	#18	Document stores

Score	0.00
Rank	#383	Overall
	#13	Vector DBMS

Website

axibase.com/docs/atsd/finance

www.graphengine.io

ravendb.net

tempoiq.com (offline)

www.transwarp.cn/en/subproduct/hippo

Technical documentation

www.graphengine.io/docs/manual

ravendb.net/docs

Developer

Axibase Corporation

Microsoft

Hibernating Rhinos

TempoIQ

Initial release

2013

2010

2012

2023

Current release

15585

5.4, July 2022

1.0, May 2023

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

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

Open Source

MIT License

Open Source

AGPL version 3, commercial license available

commercial

Cloud-based only

Only available as a cloud service

yes

DBaaS offerings (sponsored links)

Database as a Service

Providers of DBaaS offerings, please contact us to be listed.

Implementation language

Java

.NET and C

C++

Server operating systems

Linux

.NET

Linux
macOS
Raspberry Pi
Windows

Linux
macOS

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

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

yes

Vector, Numeric and String

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-like query language

SQL-like query language (RQL)

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
Proprietary protocol (Network API)
RESTful HTTP API

RESTful HTTP API

.NET Client API
F# Client API
Go Client API
Java Client API
NodeJS Client API
PHP Client API
Python Client API
RESTful HTTP API

HTTP API

RESTful HTTP API

Supported programming languages

Go
Java
PHP
Python
R
Ruby

C#
C++
F#
Visual Basic

.Net
C#
F#
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
Ruby

C#
Java
JavaScript

Node.js
Python
Ruby

C++
Java
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Triggers

yes

Realtime Alerts

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

horizontal partitioning

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Source-replica replication

Multi-source replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Default ACID transactions on the local node (eventually consistent across the cluster). Atomic operations with cluster-wide ACID transactions. Eventual consistency for indexes and full-text search indexes.

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

Transaction concepts

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

ACID, Cluster-wide transaction available

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

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

Authorization levels configured per client per database

simple authentication-based access control

Role based access control and fine grained access rights

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

provided by Google News

Trinity
2 June 2023, microsoft.com

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

How Google and Microsoft taught search to "understand" the Web
6 June 2012, Ars Technica

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

provided by Google News

RavenDB Launches Version 6.0 Lightning Fast Queries, Data Integrations, Corax Indexing Engine, and Sharding
3 October 2023, PR Newswire

RavenDB Welcomes David Baruc as Chief Revenue Officer: Seasoned Tech Leader to Drive Global Sales and ...
13 June 2023, PR Newswire

Install the NoSQL RavenDB Data System
14 May 2021, The New Stack

How I Created a RavenDB Python Client
23 September 2016, Visual Studio Magazine

RavenDB Adds Graph Queries
15 May 2019, Datanami

provided by Google News

Share this page