DBMS > BaseX vs. BigObject vs. Ehcache vs. Oracle Rdb vs. Snowflake

System Properties Comparison BaseX vs. BigObject vs. Ehcache vs. Oracle Rdb vs. Snowflake

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Light-weight Native XML DBMS with support for XQuery 3.0 and interactive GUI.

Analytic DBMS for real-time computations and queries

A widely adopted Java cache with tiered storage options

Cloud-based data warehousing service for structured and semi-structured data

Primary database model

Native XML DBMS

Relational DBMS

a hierachical model (tree) can be imposed

Key-value store

Relational DBMS

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

Score	1.84
Rank	#135	Overall
	#4	Native XML DBMS

Score	0.19
Rank	#329	Overall
	#146	Relational DBMS

Score	4.64
Rank	#68	Overall
	#8	Key-value stores

Score	1.14
Rank	#178	Overall
	#80	Relational DBMS

Score	130.36
Rank	#8	Overall
	#5	Relational DBMS

Website

basex.org

bigobject.io

www.ehcache.org

www.oracle.com/database/technologies/related/rdb.html

www.snowflake.com

Technical documentation

docs.basex.org

docs.bigobject.io

www.ehcache.org/documentation

www.oracle.com/database/technologies/related/rdb-doc.html

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

Developer

BaseX GmbH

BigObject, Inc.

Terracotta Inc, owned by Software AG

Oracle, originally developed by Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC)

Snowflake Computing Inc.

Initial release

2007

2015

2009

1984

2014

Current release

11.0, June 2024

3.10.0, March 2022

7.4.1.1, 2021

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

BSD license

commercial

free community edition available

Open Source

Apache Version 2; commercial licenses 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

Server operating systems

Linux
OS X
Windows

Linux

distributed as a docker-image
OS X

distributed as a docker-image (boot2docker)
Windows

distributed as a docker-image (boot2docker)

All OS with a Java VM

HP Open VMS

hosted

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

schema-free

Flexible Schema (defined schema, partial schema, schema free)

yes

support of semi-structured data formats (JSON, XML, Avro)

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

XQuery supports types

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.

yes

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like DML and DDL statements

yes

APIs and other access methods

Java API
RESTful HTTP API
RESTXQ
WebDAV
XML:DB
XQJ

fluentd
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

JCache

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

Actionscript
C
C#
Haskell
Java
JavaScript

Node.js
Lisp
Perl
PHP
Python
Qt
Rebol
Ruby
Scala
Visual Basic

Java

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Lua

user defined functions

Triggers

yes

via events

yes

Cache Event Listeners

similar concept for controling cloud resources

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

by using Terracotta Server

yes

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

yes

by using Terracotta Server

yes

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

none

Tunable Consistency (Strong, Eventual, Weak)

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

automatically between fact table and dimension tables

yes

Transaction concepts

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

multiple readers, single writer

yes

supports JTA and can work as an XA resource

yes, on a single node

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Read/write lock on objects (tables, trees)

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

using a tiered cache-storage approach

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

Users with fine-grained authorization concept on 4 levels

Users with fine-grained authorization concept, user roles and pluggable authentication

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.