DBMS > BigObject vs. FatDB vs. OrientDB vs. OrigoDB

System Properties Comparison BigObject vs. FatDB vs. OrientDB vs. OrigoDB

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

FatDB/FatCloud has ceased operations as a company with February 2014. FatDB is discontinued and excluded from the ranking.

Description

Analytic DBMS for real-time computations and queries

A .NET NoSQL DBMS that can integrate with and extend SQL Server.

Multi-model DBMS (Document, Graph, Key/Value)

A fully ACID in-memory object graph database

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

a hierachical model (tree) can be imposed

Document store
Key-value store

Document store
Graph DBMS
Key-value store

Document store
Object oriented DBMS

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

Score	0.19
Rank	#329	Overall
	#146	Relational DBMS

Score	3.25
Rank	#89	Overall
	#16	Document stores
	#6	Graph DBMS
	#13	Key-value stores

Score	0.06
Rank	#380	Overall
	#50	Document stores
	#19	Object oriented DBMS

Website

bigobject.io

orientdb.org

origodb.com

Technical documentation

docs.bigobject.io

www.orientdb.com/docs/last/index.html

origodb.com/docs

Developer

BigObject, Inc.

FatCloud

OrientDB LTD; CallidusCloud; SAP

Robert Friberg et al

Initial release

2015

2012

2010

2009

under the name LiveDB

Current release

3.2.29, March 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free community edition available

commercial

Open Source

Apache version 2

Open Source

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

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)

Windows

All OS with a Java JDK (>= JDK 6)

Linux
Windows

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

Schema can be enforced for whole record ("schema-full") or for some fields only ("schema-hybrid")

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

User defined using .NET types and collections

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.

can be achieved using .NET

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like DML and DDL statements

Via inetgration in SQL Server

SQL-like query language, no joins

APIs and other access methods

fluentd
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

.NET Client API
LINQ
RESTful HTTP API
RPC
Windows WCF Bindings

Tinkerpop technology stack with Blueprints, Gremlin, Pipes
Java API
RESTful HTTP/JSON API

.NET Client API
HTTP API
LINQ

Supported programming languages

.Net
C
C#
C++
Clojure
Java
JavaScript
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scala

.Net

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Lua

yes

via applications

Java, Javascript

yes

Triggers

yes

via applications

Hooks

yes

Domain Events

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

horizontal partitioning

client side managed; servers are not synchronized

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

selectable replication factor

Multi-source replication

Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

could be achieved with distributed queries

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

none

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

automatically between fact table and dimension tables

yes

relationship in graphs

depending on model

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

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

Can implement custom security layer via applications

Access rights for users and roles; record level security configurable

Role based authorization

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

Graph DBMS increased their popularity by 500% within the last 2 years
3 March 2015, Paul Andlinger

Graph DBMSs are gaining in popularity faster than any other database category
21 January 2014, Matthias Gelbmann

show all

Recent citations in the news

OrientDB: A Flexible and Scalable Multi-Model NoSQL DBMS
21 January 2022, Open Source For You

Comparing Graph Databases II. Part 2: ArangoDB, OrientDB, and… | by Sam Bell
20 September 2019, Towards Data Science

ArangoDB raises $10 million for NoSQL database management
14 March 2019, VentureBeat

The 12 Best Graph Databases to Consider for 2024
22 October 2023, Solutions Review

Introducing Gremlin The Graph Database
14 August 2013, iProgrammer

provided by Google News

Share this page