DBMS > BigObject vs. Drizzle vs. HarperDB vs. TinkerGraph

System Properties Comparison BigObject vs. Drizzle vs. HarperDB vs. TinkerGraph

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.

Description

Analytic DBMS for real-time computations and queries

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

HarperDB takes the "stack" out of "tech stack" by combining an ultra-fast document-style data store, in-memory cache, real-time message broker, and your application components into a single distributed technology.

A lightweight, in-memory graph engine that serves as a reference implementation of the TinkerPop3 API

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

a hierachical model (tree) can be imposed

Relational DBMS

Document store

Graph DBMS

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

Score	0.13
Rank	#329	Overall
	#147	Relational DBMS

Score	0.55
Rank	#243	Overall
	#38	Document stores

Score	0.08
Rank	#345	Overall
	#34	Graph DBMS

Website

bigobject.io

www.harperdb.io

tinkerpop.apache.org/docs/current/reference/#tinkergraph-gremlin

Technical documentation

docs.bigobject.io

docs.harperdb.io/docs

Developer

BigObject, Inc.

Drizzle project, originally started by Brian Aker

HarperDB

Initial release

2015

2008

2017

2009

Current release

7.2.4, September 2012

3.1, August 2021

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free community edition available

Open Source

GNU GPL

commercial

free community edition available

Open Source

Apache 2.0

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++

Node.js

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)

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X

Linux
OS X

Data scheme

yes

dynamic schema

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

JSON data 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.

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like DML and DDL statements

yes

with proprietary extensions

SQL-like data manipulation statements

APIs and other access methods

fluentd
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

JDBC

JDBC
ODBC
React Hooks
RESTful HTTP/JSON API
WebSocket

TinkerPop 3

Supported programming languages

C
C++
Java
PHP

.Net
C
C#
C++
ColdFusion
D
Dart
Delphi
Erlang
Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Lisp
MatLab
Objective C
Perl
PHP
PowerShell
Prolog
Python
R
Ruby
Rust
Scala
Swift

Groovy
Java

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Lua

Custom Functions

since release 3.1

Triggers

hooks for callbacks inside the server can be used.

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

A table resides as a whole on one (or more) nodes in a cluster

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

yes

the nodes on which a table resides can be defined

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

none

Immediate Consistency

none

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

automatically between fact table and dimension tables

yes

Relationships in graphs

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Atomic execution of specific operations

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Read/write lock on objects (tables, trees)

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

yes, using LMDB

optional

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

Access rights for users and roles

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

DB-Engines blog posts

MySQL won the April ranking; did its forks follow?
1 April 2015, Paul Andlinger

Has MySQL finally lost its mojo?
1 July 2013, Matthias Gelbmann

show all

Recent citations in the news

HarperDB Attracts Significant Growth Investment from Serent Capital
12 June 2024, Business Wire

Defense Innovation Unit Issues Success Memo to HarperDB for its Common Operation Database Prototype
11 September 2024, PR Newswire

DoD Successfully Deploys Commercial AI Solutions for COD Project
10 September 2024, Defense Innovation Unit

Serent Capital invests in software firm HarperDB
12 June 2024, PE Hub

HarperDB Receives Growth Investment from Serent Capital
12 June 2024, FinSMEs

provided by Google News

Unit testing Apache TinkerPop transactions: From TinkerGraph to Amazon Neptune
3 June 2024, AWS Blog

Simple Deployment of a Graph Database: JanusGraph
12 October 2020, Towards Data Science

Introducing Gremlin query hints for Amazon Neptune
26 February 2019, AWS Blog

provided by Google News

Share this page