DBMS > BigObject vs. EJDB vs. Infobright vs. RavenDB

System Properties Comparison BigObject vs. EJDB vs. Infobright vs. RavenDB

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Analytic DBMS for real-time computations and queries

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

High performant column-oriented DBMS for analytic workloads using MySQL or PostgreSQL as a frontend

Open Source Operational and Transactional Enterprise NoSQL Document Database

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

a hierachical model (tree) can be imposed

Document store

Relational DBMS

Document store

Secondary database models

Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS
Time Series DBMS

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

Score	0.13
Rank	#333	Overall
	#147	Relational DBMS

Score	0.27
Rank	#297	Overall
	#44	Document stores

Score	0.96
Rank	#194	Overall
	#91	Relational DBMS

Score	2.92
Rank	#101	Overall
	#18	Document stores

Website

bigobject.io

github.com/Softmotions/ejdb

ignitetech.com/softwarelibrary/infobrightdb

ravendb.net

Technical documentation

docs.bigobject.io

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

ravendb.net/docs

Developer

BigObject, Inc.

Softmotions

Ignite Technologies Inc.; formerly InfoBright Inc.

Hibernating Rhinos

Initial release

2015

2012

2005

2010

Current release

5.4, July 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free community edition available

Open Source

GPLv2

commercial

The open source (GPLv2) version did not support inserts/updates/deletes and was discontinued with July 2016

Open Source

AGPL version 3, commercial license available

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

Server operating systems

Linux

distributed as a docker-image
OS X

distributed as a docker-image (boot2docker)
Windows

distributed as a docker-image (boot2docker)

server-less

Linux
Windows

Linux
macOS
Raspberry Pi
Windows

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

yes

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

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

Knowledge Grid Technology used instead

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like DML and DDL statements

yes

SQL-like query language (RQL)

APIs and other access methods

fluentd
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

in-process shared library

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

.NET Client API
F# Client API
Go Client API
Java Client API
NodeJS Client API
PHP Client API
Python Client API
RESTful HTTP API

Supported programming languages

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

.Net
C
C#
C++
D
Eiffel
Erlang
Haskell
Java
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scheme
Tcl

.Net
C#
F#
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
Ruby

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Lua

yes

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

Source-replica replication

Multi-source replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

none

Immediate Consistency

Default ACID transactions on the local node (eventually consistent across the cluster). Atomic operations with cluster-wide ACID transactions. Eventual consistency for indexes and full-text search indexes.

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

automatically between fact table and dimension tables

typically not needed, however similar functionality with collection joins possible

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

ACID, Cluster-wide transaction available

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

In-memory capabilities

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

yes

User concepts

Access control

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

exploiting MySQL or PostgreSQL frontend capabilities

Authorization levels configured per client per database

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

RavenDB Welcomes David Baruc as Chief Revenue Officer: Seasoned Tech Leader to Drive Global Sales and ...
13 June 2023, PR Newswire

Install the NoSQL RavenDB Data System
14 May 2021, The New Stack

Oren Eini on RavenDB, Including Consistency Guarantees and C# as the Implementation Language
23 May 2022, InfoQ.com

How I Created a RavenDB Python Client
23 September 2016, Visual Studio Magazine

RavenDB Adds Graph Queries
15 May 2019, Datanami

provided by Google News

Share this page