DBMS > BigObject vs. Graph Engine vs. Hazelcast vs. OrigoDB

System Properties Comparison BigObject vs. Graph Engine vs. Hazelcast vs. OrigoDB

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

A distributed in-memory data processing engine, underpinned by a strongly-typed RAM store and a general distributed computation engine

A widely adopted in-memory data grid

A fully ACID in-memory object graph database

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

a hierachical model (tree) can be imposed

Graph DBMS
Key-value store

Key-value store

Document store
Object oriented DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store

JSON support with IMDG 3.12

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

Score	0.19
Rank	#329	Overall
	#146	Relational DBMS

Score	0.67
Rank	#232	Overall
	#21	Graph DBMS
	#34	Key-value stores

Score	5.46
Rank	#61	Overall
	#7	Key-value stores

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

Website

Technical documentation

docs.bigobject.io

www.graphengine.io/docs/manual

hazelcast.org/imdg/docs

origodb.com/docs

Developer

BigObject, Inc.

Microsoft

Hazelcast

Robert Friberg et al

Initial release

2015

2010

2008

2009

under the name LiveDB

Current release

5.3.6, November 2023

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free community edition available

Open Source

MIT License

Open Source

Apache Version 2; commercial licenses available

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

.NET and 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)

.NET

All OS with a Java VM

Linux
Windows

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

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.

yes

the object must implement a serialization strategy

can be achieved using .NET

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like DML and DDL statements

SQL-like query language

APIs and other access methods

fluentd
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

RESTful HTTP API

JCache
JPA
Memcached protocol
RESTful HTTP API

.NET Client API
HTTP API
LINQ

Supported programming languages

C#
C++
F#
Visual Basic

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

.Net

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Lua

yes

Event Listeners, Executor Services

yes

Triggers

yes

Events

yes

Domain Events

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

horizontal partitioning

Sharding

horizontal partitioning

client side managed; servers are not synchronized

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

yes

Replicated Map

Source-replica 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 or Eventual Consistency selectable by user

Raft Consensus Algorithm

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

automatically between fact table and dimension tables

depending on model

Transaction concepts

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

one or two-phase-commit; repeatable reads; read commited

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Read/write lock on objects (tables, trees)

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

optional: either by committing a write-ahead log (WAL) to the local persistent storage or by dumping the memory to a persistent storage

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

Role-based access control

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

Recent citations in the news

Trinity
30 October 2010, Microsoft

Open source Microsoft Graph Engine takes on Neo4j
13 February 2017, InfoWorld

IBM releases Graph, a service that can outperform SQL databases
27 July 2016, GeekWire

The graph analytics landscape 2019 - DataScienceCentral.com
27 February 2019, Data Science Central

Aerospike Is Now a Graph Database, Too
21 June 2023, Datanami

provided by Google News

Hazelcast Weaves Wider Logic Threads Through The Data Fabric
7 March 2024, Forbes

Hazelcast 5.4 real time data processing platform boosts AI and consistency
17 April 2024, VentureBeat

Hazelcast appoints Anthony Griffin as Chief Architect -
11 June 2024, Enterprise Times

Hazelcast Showcases Real-Time Data Platform at 2024 Gartner Summit
15 May 2024, Datanami

Real-Time Data Platform Hazelcast Introduces New Chief Technology Officer Adrian Soars
7 November 2023, Finovate

provided by Google News

Share this page