DBMS > BigObject vs. EJDB vs. Infobright vs. Trafodion vs. Ultipa

System Properties Comparison BigObject vs. EJDB vs. Infobright vs. Trafodion vs. Ultipa

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Apache Trafodion has been retired in 2021. Therefore it is excluded from the DB-Engines Ranking.

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

Transactional SQL-on-Hadoop DBMS

High performance Graph DBMS supporting HTAP high availability cluster deployment

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

a hierachical model (tree) can be imposed

Document store

Relational DBMS

Graph DBMS

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

Score	0.19
Rank	#329	Overall
	#146	Relational DBMS

Score	0.31
Rank	#296	Overall
	#44	Document stores

Score	1.02
Rank	#192	Overall
	#90	Relational DBMS

Score	0.19
Rank	#330	Overall
	#30	Graph DBMS

Website

bigobject.io

github.com/Softmotions/ejdb

ignitetech.com/softwarelibrary/infobrightdb

trafodion.apache.org

www.ultipa.com

Technical documentation

docs.bigobject.io

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

trafodion.apache.org/documentation.html

www.ultipa.com/document

Developer

BigObject, Inc.

Softmotions

Ignite Technologies Inc.; formerly InfoBright Inc.

Apache Software Foundation, originally developed by HP

Ultipa

Initial release

2015

2012

2005

2014

2019

Current release

2.3.0, February 2019

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

Apache 2.0

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++, 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)

server-less

Linux
Windows

Linux

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

yes

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

APIs and other access methods

fluentd
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

in-process shared library

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

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

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC/ADO.Net

C++
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Lua

Java Stored Procedures

Triggers

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

yes, via HBase

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

via user defined functions and HBase

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

none

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

automatically between fact table and dimension tables

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

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

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

Evaluating HTAP Databases for Machine Learning Applications
2 November 2016, KDnuggets

HP Throws Trafodion Hat into OLTP Hadoop Ring
14 July 2014, Datanami

Low-latency, distributed database architectures are critical for emerging fog applications
7 April 2022, Embedded Computing Design

Apache Software Foundation Releases its 2019 Fiscal Year Report
17 August 2019, Open Source For You

provided by Google News

High-performance computing's role in real-time graph analytics - DataScienceCentral.com
30 January 2024, Data Science Central

provided by Google News

Share this page