DBMS > BigObject vs. OrigoDB vs. Stardog vs. Valentina Server

System Properties Comparison BigObject vs. OrigoDB vs. Stardog vs. Valentina Server

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 fully ACID in-memory object graph database

Enterprise Knowledge Graph platform and graph DBMS with high availability, high performance reasoning, and virtualization

Object-relational database and reports server

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

a hierachical model (tree) can be imposed

Document store
Object oriented DBMS

Graph DBMS
RDF store

Relational DBMS

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

Score	0.13
Rank	#333	Overall
	#147	Relational DBMS

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

Score	2.02
Rank	#123	Overall
	#11	Graph DBMS
	#6	RDF stores

Score	0.17
Rank	#327	Overall
	#145	Relational DBMS

Website

Technical documentation

docs.bigobject.io

origodb.com/docs

docs.stardog.com

valentina-db.com/docs/dokuwiki/v5/doku.php

Developer

BigObject, Inc.

Robert Friberg et al

Stardog-Union

Paradigma Software

Initial release

2015

2009

under the name LiveDB

2010

1999

Current release

7.3.0, May 2020

5.7.5

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free community edition available

Open Source

commercial

60-day fully-featured trial license; 1-year fully-featured non-commercial use license for academics/students

commercial

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)

Linux
Windows

Linux
macOS
Windows

Linux
OS X
Windows

Data scheme

yes

schema-free and OWL/RDFS-schema support

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

User defined using .NET types and collections

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.

can be achieved using .NET

Import/export of XML data possible

Secondary indexes

yes

supports real-time indexing in full-text and geospatial

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like DML and DDL statements

Yes, compatible with all major SQL variants through dedicated BI/SQL Server

yes

APIs and other access methods

fluentd
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

.NET Client API
HTTP API
LINQ

GraphQL query language
HTTP API
Jena RDF API
OWL
RDF4J API
Sesame REST HTTP Protocol
SNARL
SPARQL
Spring Data
Stardog Studio
TinkerPop 3

ODBC

Supported programming languages

.Net

.Net
Clojure
Groovy
Java
JavaScript
Python
Ruby

.Net
C
C#
C++
Objective-C
PHP
Ruby
Visual Basic
Visual Basic.NET

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Lua

yes

user defined functions and aggregates, HTTP Server extensions in Java

yes

Triggers

yes

Domain Events

yes

via event handlers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

horizontal partitioning

client side managed; servers are not synchronized

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

Source-replica replication

Multi-source replication in HA-Cluster

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

none

Immediate Consistency in HA-Cluster

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

automatically between fact table and dimension tables

depending on model

yes

relationships in graphs

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

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

Role based authorization

Access rights for users and roles

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

A Look at Valentina — SitePoint
18 April 2014, SitePoint

MySQL GUI Tools for Windows and Ubuntu/Linux: Top 8 free or open source
7 December 2018, H2S Media

provided by Google News

Share this page