DBMS > Badger vs. GigaSpaces vs. Lovefield vs. RDFox

System Properties Comparison Badger vs. GigaSpaces vs. Lovefield vs. RDFox

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.

High performance in-memory data grid platform, powering three products: Smart Cache, Smart ODS (Operational Data Store), Smart Augmented Transactions

Embeddable relational database for web apps written in pure JavaScript

High performance knowledge graph and semantic reasoning engine

Primary database model

Key-value store

Document store
Object oriented DBMS

Values are user defined objects

Relational DBMS

Graph DBMS
RDF store

Secondary database models

Graph DBMS
Search engine

Relational DBMS

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

Score	0.22
Rank	#320	Overall
	#47	Key-value stores

Score	1.03
Rank	#188	Overall
	#32	Document stores
	#6	Object oriented DBMS

Score	0.33
Rank	#286	Overall
	#131	Relational DBMS

Score	0.29
Rank	#300	Overall
	#24	Graph DBMS
	#13	RDF stores

Website

github.com/dgraph-io/badger

www.gigaspaces.com

google.github.io/lovefield

www.oxfordsemantic.tech

Technical documentation

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

docs.gigaspaces.com/latest/landing.html

github.com/google/lovefield/blob/master/docs/spec_index.md

docs.oxfordsemantic.tech

Developer

DGraph Labs

Gigaspaces Technologies

Google

Oxford Semantic Technologies

Initial release

2017

2000

2014

2017

Current release

15.5, September 2020

2.1.12, February 2017

6.0, Septermber 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

Apache Version 2; Commercial licenses available

Open Source

Apache 2.0

commercial

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

JavaScript

C++

Server operating systems

BSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

Linux
macOS
Solaris
Windows

server-less, requires a JavaScript environment (browser, Node.js)

tested with Chrome, Firefox, IE, Safari

Linux
macOS
Windows

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

RDF schemas

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

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.

XML can be used for describing objects metadata

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-99 for query and DML statements

SQL-like query language

via JavaScript builder pattern

APIs and other access methods

GigaSpaces LRMI
Hibernate
JCache
JDBC
JPA
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API
Spring Data

RESTful HTTP API
SPARQL 1.1

Supported programming languages

.Net
C++
Java
Python
Scala

JavaScript

C
Java

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Triggers

yes, event driven architecture

Using read-only observers

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

Multi-source replication

synchronous or asynchronous
Source-replica replication

synchronous or asynchronous

none

replication via a shared file system

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Map-Reduce pattern can be built with XAP task executors

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

none

Immediate Consistency

Consistency level configurable: ALL, QUORUM, ANY

Immediate Consistency in stand-alone mode, Eventual Consistency in replicated setups

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

yes, by using IndexedDB or the cloud service Firebase Realtime Database

yes

In-memory capabilities

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

yes

using MemoryDB

yes

User concepts

Access control

Role-based access control

Roles, resources, and access types

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

Gigaspaces: Accelerate Your Digital Transformation & Applications
13 June 2024, gigaspaces.com

GigaSpaces to hand out almost $14 million in dividends following Cloudify’s acquisition by Dell
19 July 2023, CTech

Data Sciences Corporation partners with GigaSpaces Technologies to usher DIH technology to enterprises in SA
10 October 2023, ITWeb

GigaSpaces Announces Version 16.0 with Breakthrough Data Integration Tools to Ease Enterprises' Digital ...
3 November 2021, PR Newswire

The insideBIGDATA IMPACT 50 List for Q1 2024
18 January 2024, insideBIGDATA

provided by Google News

Use semantic reasoning to infer new facts from your RDF graph by integrating RDFox with Amazon Neptune | Amazon ...
20 February 2023, AWS Blog

The intuitions behind Knowledge Graphs and Reasoning | by Peter Crocker
5 May 2020, Towards Data Science

Eight interesting open-source graph databases
3 January 2023, INDIAai

Financial Crime Discovery using Amazon EKS and Graph Databases | Amazon Web Services
1 February 2022, AWS Blog

Top 9 Open Source Graph Databases – AIM
7 November 2022, Analytics India Magazine

provided by Google News

Share this page