DBMS > BigObject vs. Drizzle vs. FatDB

System Properties Comparison BigObject vs. Drizzle vs. FatDB

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Drizzle has published its last release in September 2012. The open-source project is discontinued and Drizzle is excluded from the DB-Engines ranking.

FatDB/FatCloud has ceased operations as a company with February 2014. FatDB is discontinued and excluded from the ranking.

Description

Analytic DBMS for real-time computations and queries

MySQL fork with a pluggable micro-kernel and with an emphasis of performance over compatibility.

A .NET NoSQL DBMS that can integrate with and extend SQL Server.

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

a hierachical model (tree) can be imposed

Relational DBMS

Document store
Key-value store

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

Score	0.13
Rank	#342	Overall
	#150	Relational DBMS

Website

bigobject.io

Technical documentation

docs.bigobject.io

Developer

BigObject, Inc.

Drizzle project, originally started by Brian Aker

FatCloud

Initial release

2015

2008

2012

Current release

7.2.4, September 2012

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free community edition available

Open Source

GNU GPL

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

C++

Server operating systems

Linux

distributed as a docker-image
OS X

distributed as a docker-image (boot2docker)
Windows

distributed as a docker-image (boot2docker)

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X

Windows

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

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.

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like DML and DDL statements

yes

with proprietary extensions

Via inetgration in SQL Server

APIs and other access methods

fluentd
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

JDBC

.NET Client API
LINQ
RESTful HTTP API
RPC
Windows WCF Bindings

Supported programming languages

C
C++
Java
PHP

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Lua

yes

via applications

Triggers

hooks for callbacks inside the server can be used.

yes

via applications

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

selectable replication factor

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

none

Eventual Consistency
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

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Read/write lock on objects (tables, trees)

yes

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

Pluggable authentication mechanisms

e.g. LDAP, HTTP

Can implement custom security layer via applications

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.