DBMS > BigObject vs. Greenplum vs. mSQL vs. OrigoDB vs. SWC-DB

System Properties Comparison BigObject vs. Greenplum vs. mSQL vs. OrigoDB vs. SWC-DB

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Analytic DBMS for real-time computations and queries

Analytic Database platform built on PostgreSQL. Full name is Pivotal Greenplum Database

A logical database in Greenplum is an array of individual PostgreSQL databases working together to present a single database image.

mSQL (Mini SQL) is a simple and lightweight RDBMS

A fully ACID in-memory object graph database

A high performance, scalable Wide Column DBMS

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

a hierachical model (tree) can be imposed

Relational DBMS

Document store
Object oriented DBMS

Wide column store

Secondary database models

Document store
Spatial DBMS

Time Series DBMS

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

Score	0.13
Rank	#333	Overall
	#147	Relational DBMS

Score	8.37
Rank	#48	Overall
	#30	Relational DBMS

Score	1.27
Rank	#167	Overall
	#77	Relational DBMS

Score	0.00
Rank	#383	Overall
	#53	Document stores
	#20	Object oriented DBMS

Score	0.01
Rank	#376	Overall
	#13	Wide column stores

Website

bigobject.io

greenplum.org

hughestech.com.au/products/msql

origodb.com

github.com/kashirin-alex/swc-db
www.swcdb.org

Technical documentation

docs.bigobject.io

docs.greenplum.org

origodb.com/docs

Developer

BigObject, Inc.

Pivotal Software Inc.

Hughes Technologies

Robert Friberg et al

Alex Kashirin

Initial release

2015

2005

1994

2009

under the name LiveDB

2020

Current release

7.0.0, September 2023

4.4, October 2021

0.5, April 2021

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free community edition available

Open Source

Apache 2.0

commercial

free licenses can be provided

Open Source

GPL V3

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++

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

AIX
HP-UX
Linux
OS X
Solaris SPARC/x86
Windows

Linux
Windows

Linux

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

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

since Version 4.2

can be achieved using .NET

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like DML and DDL statements

yes

A subset of ANSI SQL is implemented

no subqueries, aggregate functions, views, foreign keys, triggers

SQL-like query language

APIs and other access methods

fluentd
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

JDBC
ODBC

.NET Client API
HTTP API
LINQ

Proprietary protocol
Thrift

Supported programming languages

C
Java
Perl
Python
R

C
C++
Delphi
Java
Perl
PHP
Tcl

.Net

C++

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Lua

yes

Triggers

yes

Domain Events

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

none

horizontal partitioning

client side managed; servers are not synchronized

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

Source-replica replication

none

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

none

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

automatically between fact table and dimension tables

yes

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

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

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

VMware Greenplum on AWS: Parallel Postgres for Enterprise Analytics at Scale | Amazon Web Services
9 September 2019, AWS Blog

1. Introducing the Greenplum Database - Data Warehousing with Greenplum [Book]
6 December 2018, O'Reilly Media

RSA: EMC integrates Hadoop with Greenplum database
26 February 2013, DatacenterDynamics

Greenplum 6 ventures outside the analytic box
19 March 2019, ZDNet

Greenplum 6 review: Jack of all trades, master of some
7 November 2019, InfoWorld

provided by Google News

Writing a Web Service in Perl
9 July 2003, PCQuest

Higher Education PS rules out ghost students before PAC
29 November 2018, diggers.news

provided by Google News

2022 All O-Zone Football Team
17 December 2022, Ozarks Sports Zone

provided by Google News

Share this page