DBMS > Badger vs. EJDB vs. Google Cloud Bigtable vs. Splice Machine

System Properties Comparison Badger vs. EJDB vs. Google Cloud Bigtable vs. Splice Machine

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

An embeddable, persistent, simple and fast Key-Value Store, written purely in Go.

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

Google's NoSQL Big Data database service. It's the same database that powers many core Google services, including Search, Analytics, Maps, and Gmail.

Open-Source SQL RDBMS for Operational and Analytical use cases with native Machine Learning, powered by Hadoop and Spark

Primary database model

Key-value store

Document store

Key-value store
Wide column store

Relational DBMS

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

Score	0.14
Rank	#331	Overall
	#49	Key-value stores

Score	0.27
Rank	#297	Overall
	#44	Document stores

Score	3.26
Rank	#92	Overall
	#13	Key-value stores
	#8	Wide column stores

Score	0.54
Rank	#250	Overall
	#114	Relational DBMS

Website

github.com/dgraph-io/badger

github.com/Softmotions/ejdb

cloud.google.com/bigtable

splicemachine.com

Technical documentation

godoc.org/github.com/dgraph-io/badger

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

cloud.google.com/bigtable/docs

splicemachine.com/how-it-works

Developer

DGraph Labs

Softmotions

Google

Splice Machine

Initial release

2017

2012

2015

2014

Current release

3.1, March 2021

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

GPLv2

commercial

Open Source

AGPL 3.0, commercial license available

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

Server operating systems

BSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

server-less

hosted

Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

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

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

APIs and other access methods

in-process shared library

gRPC (using protocol buffers) API
HappyBase (Python library)
HBase compatible API (Java)

JDBC
Native Spark Datasource
ODBC

Supported programming languages

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

C#
C++
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

C#
C++
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python
R
Scala

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Java

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

Shared Nothhing Auto-Sharding, Columnar Partitioning

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

Internal replication in Colossus, and regional replication between two clusters in different zones

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Yes, via Full Spark Integration

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

none

Immediate consistency (for a single cluster), Eventual consistency (for two or more replicated clusters)

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

typically not needed, however similar functionality with collection joins possible

yes

Transaction concepts

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

Atomic single-row operations

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Read/Write Locking

yes

yes, multi-version concurrency control (MVCC)

Durability

Support for making data persistent

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

Access rights for users, groups and roles based on Google Cloud Identity and Access Management (IAM)

Access rights for users, groups and roles according to SQL-standard

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

Google's AI-First Strategy Brings Vector Support To Cloud Databases
1 March 2024, Forbes

Google Introduces Autoscaling for Cloud Bigtable for Optimizing Costs
31 January 2022, InfoQ.com

Google scales up Cloud Bigtable NoSQL database
27 January 2022, TechTarget

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

Google Cloud makes it cheaper to run smaller workloads on Bigtable
7 April 2020, TechCrunch

provided by Google News

Machine learning data pipeline outfit Splice Machine files for insolvency
26 August 2021, The Register

Splice Machine Launches the Splice Machine Feature Store to Simplify Feature Engineering and Democratize Machine ...
19 January 2021, PR Newswire

Splice Machine Launches Feature Store to Simplify Feature Engineering
19 January 2021, Datanami

New Splice Machine RDBMS unites OLTP and OLAP
18 November 2015, CIO

Distributed SQL System Review: Snowflake vs Splice Machine
18 September 2019, Towards Data Science

provided by Google News

Share this page