DBMS > BigObject vs. EJDB vs. MySQL vs. SingleStore

System Properties Comparison BigObject vs. EJDB vs. MySQL vs. SingleStore

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)

Widely used open source RDBMS

MySQL wire-compliant distributed RDBMS that combines an in-memory row-oriented and a disc-based column-oriented storage with patented universal storage to handle transactional and analytical workloads in one single table type

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

a hierachical model (tree) can be imposed

Document store

Relational DBMS

Key/Value like access via memcached API

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Spatial DBMS

Document store
Spatial DBMS
Time Series DBMS
Vector DBMS

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

Score	0.13
Rank	#329	Overall
	#147	Relational DBMS

Score	0.13
Rank	#331	Overall
	#46	Document stores

Score	1029.49
Rank	#2	Overall
	#2	Relational DBMS

Score	4.02
Rank	#74	Overall
	#39	Relational DBMS

Website

bigobject.io

github.com/Softmotions/ejdb

www.mysql.com

www.singlestore.com

Technical documentation

docs.bigobject.io

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

dev.mysql.com/doc

docs.singlestore.com

Developer

BigObject, Inc.

Softmotions

Oracle

since 2010, originally MySQL AB, then Sun

SingleStore Inc.

Initial release

2015

2012

1995

2013

Current release

9.0.0, July 2024

8.5, January 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free community edition available

Open Source

GPLv2

Open Source

GPL version 2. Commercial licenses with extended functionallity are available

commercial

free developer edition 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

C and C++

C++, Go

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

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

Linux

64 bit version required

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.

yes

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like DML and DDL statements

yes

with proprietary extensions

yes

but no triggers and foreign keys

APIs and other access methods

fluentd
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

in-process shared library

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
Proprietary native API

Cluster Management API

as HTTP Rest and CLI
HTTP API
JDBC
MongoDB API
ODBC

Supported programming languages

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

Ada
C
C#
C++
D
Delphi
Eiffel
Erlang
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scheme
Tcl

Bash
C
C#
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Lua

yes

proprietary syntax

yes

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

horizontal partitioning, sharding with MySQL Cluster or MySQL Fabric

Sharding

hash partitioning

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

Source-replica replication

stores two copies of each physical data partition on two separate nodes

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

can define user-defined aggregate functions for map-reduce-style calculations

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

not for MyISAM storage engine

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

not for MyISAM storage engine

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Read/write lock on objects (tables, trees)

yes

Read/Write Locking

yes

table locks or row locks depending on storage engine

yes, multi-version concurrency control (MVCC)

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

All updates are persistent, including those to disk-based columnstores and memory-based row stores. Transaction commits are supported via write-ahead log.

In-memory capabilities

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

yes

User concepts

Access control

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

no user groups or roles

Fine grained access control via users, groups 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.