DBMS > BigObject vs. Blazegraph vs. EJDB vs. TimesTen

System Properties Comparison BigObject vs. Blazegraph vs. EJDB vs. TimesTen

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Amazon has acquired Blazegraph's domain and (probably) product. It is said that Amazon Neptune is based on Blazegraph.

Description

Analytic DBMS for real-time computations and queries

High-performance graph database supporting Semantic Web (RDF/SPARQL) and Graph Database (tinkerpop3, blueprints, vertex-centric) APIs with scale-out and High Availability.

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

In-Memory RDBMS compatible to Oracle

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

a hierachical model (tree) can be imposed

Graph DBMS
RDF store

Document store

Relational DBMS

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

Score	0.13
Rank	#333	Overall
	#147	Relational DBMS

Score	0.75
Rank	#219	Overall
	#19	Graph DBMS
	#8	RDF stores

Score	0.27
Rank	#297	Overall
	#44	Document stores

Score	1.31
Rank	#163	Overall
	#74	Relational DBMS

Website

bigobject.io

blazegraph.com

github.com/Softmotions/ejdb

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

Technical documentation

docs.bigobject.io

wiki.blazegraph.com

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

docs.oracle.com/database/timesten-18.1

Developer

BigObject, Inc.

Blazegraph

Softmotions

Oracle, TimesTen Performance Software, HP

originally founded in HP Labs it was acquired by Oracle in 2005

Initial release

2015

2006

2012

1998

Current release

2.1.5, March 2019

11 Release 2 (11.2.2.8.0)

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free community edition available

Open Source

extended commercial license available

Open Source

GPLv2

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

Server operating systems

Linux

distributed as a docker-image
OS X

distributed as a docker-image (boot2docker)
Windows

distributed as a docker-image (boot2docker)

Linux
OS X
Windows

server-less

AIX
HP-UX
Linux
OS X
Solaris SPARC/x86
Windows

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

RDF literal types

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

SQL-like DML and DDL statements

SPARQL is used as query language

yes

APIs and other access methods

fluentd
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

Java API
RESTful HTTP API
SPARQL QUERY
SPARQL UPDATE
TinkerPop 3

in-process shared library

JDBC
ODBC
ODP.NET
Oracle Call Interface (OCI)

Supported programming languages

.Net
C
C++
Java
JavaScript
PHP
Python
Ruby

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

C
C++
Java
PL/SQL

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Lua

yes

PL/SQL

Triggers

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

yes

none

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

none

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

automatically between fact table and dimension tables

yes

Relationships in Graphs

typically not needed, however similar functionality with collection joins possible

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Read/write lock on objects (tables, trees)

yes

Read/Write Locking

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

by means of logfiles and checkpoints

In-memory capabilities

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

yes

User concepts

Access control

Security and Authentication via Web Application Container (Tomcat, Jetty)

fine grained access rights 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

Back to the future: Does graph database success hang on query language?
5 March 2018, ZDNet

Harnessing GPUs Delivers a Big Speedup for Graph Analytics
15 December 2015, Datanami

This AI Paper Introduces A Comprehensive RDF Dataset With Over 26 Billion Triples Covering Scholarly Data Across All Scientific Disciplines
19 August 2023, MarkTechPost

Representation Learning on RDF* and LPG Knowledge Graphs
24 September 2020, Towards Data Science

Faster with GPUs: 5 turbocharged databases
26 September 2016, InfoWorld

provided by Google News

In-memory databases with Emulex Gen 7
25 October 2023, Broadcom Inc.

provided by Google News

Share this page