DBMS > BigObject vs. EsgynDB vs. etcd vs. Hypertable vs. Trafodion

System Properties Comparison BigObject vs. EsgynDB vs. etcd vs. Hypertable vs. Trafodion

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Hypertable has stopped its further development with March 2016 and is removed from the DB-Engines ranking.

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

Enterprise-class SQL-on-Hadoop solution, powered by Apache Trafodion

A distributed reliable key-value store

An open source BigTable implementation based on distributed file systems such as Hadoop

Transactional SQL-on-Hadoop DBMS

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

a hierachical model (tree) can be imposed

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

Score	0.13
Rank	#333	Overall
	#147	Relational DBMS

Score	0.16
Rank	#329	Overall
	#146	Relational DBMS

Score	7.25
Rank	#54	Overall
	#5	Key-value stores

Website

bigobject.io

www.esgyn.cn

etcd.io
github.com/etcd-io/etcd

trafodion.apache.org

Technical documentation

docs.bigobject.io

etcd.io/docs
github.com/etcd-io/etcd/tree/master/Documentation

trafodion.apache.org/documentation.html

Developer

BigObject, Inc.

Esgyn

Hypertable Inc.

Apache Software Foundation, originally developed by HP

Initial release

2015

2009

2014

Current release

3.4, August 2019

0.9.8.11, March 2016

2.3.0, February 2019

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free community edition available

commercial

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

Open Source

GNU version 3. Commercial license 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++, Java

C++

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)

Linux

FreeBSD
Linux
Windows

experimental

Linux
OS X
Windows

an inofficial Windows port is available

Linux

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

yes

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

restricted

only exact value or prefix value scans

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like DML and DDL statements

yes

APIs and other access methods

fluentd
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

gRPC
JSON over HTTP

C++ API
Thrift

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC/ADO.Net

.Net
C
C++
Clojure
Erlang
Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Perl
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Rust
Scala
Tcl

C++
Java
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC/ADO.Net

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Lua

Java Stored Procedures

Triggers

yes, watching key changes

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 between multi datacenters

Using Raft consensus algorithm to ensure data replication with strong consistency among multiple replicas.

selectable replication factor on file system level

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

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

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

Monitor Amazon EKS Control Plane metrics using AWS Open Source monitoring services | Amazon Web Services
12 October 2023, AWS Blog

Apache APISIX Without etcd?
27 July 2023, hackernoon.com

RBI reiterates need for underlying forex exposure for rupee derivatives transactions | Mint
5 April 2024, Mint

Killing a market, softly: How an RBI communique could end India's thriving ETCD market
7 April 2024, The Economic Times

Public preview: AKS cluster control plane metrics in managed Prometheus | Azure updates
12 February 2024, Microsoft

provided by Google News

SQL and TimescaleDB. This article takes a closer look into… | by Alibaba Cloud
31 July 2019, DataDrivenInvestor

TimescaleDB goes distributed; implements ‘Chunking’ over ‘Sharding’ for scaling-out
22 August 2019, Packt Hub

Decorate your Windows XP with Hyperdesk
30 July 2008, CNET

The Collective: Customize Your Computer & Your Phone With Star Trek
18 March 2009, TrekMovie

NoSQL Market: A well-defined technological growth map with an impact-analysis
19 June 2020, Inter Press Service

provided by Google News

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

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

provided by Google News

Share this page