DBMS > Coveo vs. OrigoDB vs. Riak KV vs. Valentina Server

System Properties Comparison Coveo vs. OrigoDB vs. Riak KV vs. Valentina Server

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

AI-powered hosted search, recommendation and personalization platform providing tools for both low-code and full-code development

A fully ACID in-memory object graph database

Distributed, fault tolerant key-value store

Object-relational database and reports server

Primary database model

Search engine

Document store
Object oriented DBMS

Key-value store

with links between data sets and object tags for the creation of secondary indexes

Relational DBMS

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

Score	2.28
Rank	#114	Overall
	#11	Search engines

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

Score	4.10
Rank	#82	Overall
	#9	Key-value stores

Score	0.17
Rank	#327	Overall
	#145	Relational DBMS

Website

www.coveo.com

origodb.com

www.valentina-db.net

Technical documentation

docs.coveo.com

origodb.com/docs

www.tiot.jp/riak-docs/riak/kv/latest

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

Developer

Coveo

Robert Friberg et al

OpenSource, formerly Basho Technologies

Paradigma Software

Initial release

2012

2009

under the name LiveDB

2009

1999

Current release

3.2.0, December 2022

5.7.5

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache version 2, commercial enterprise edition

commercial

Cloud-based only

Only available as a cloud service

yes

DBaaS offerings (sponsored links)

Database as a Service

Providers of DBaaS offerings, please contact us to be listed.

Implementation language

Erlang

Server operating systems

hosted

Linux
Windows

Linux
OS X

Linux
OS X
Windows

Data scheme

hybrid - fields need to be configured prior to indexing, but relationships can be exploited at query time without pre-configuration

yes

schema-free

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

Secondary indexes

yes

restricted

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

APIs and other access methods

RESTful HTTP API

.NET Client API
HTTP API
LINQ

HTTP API
Native Erlang Interface

ODBC

Supported programming languages

C#
Java
JavaScript
Python

.Net

unofficial client library
C#
C++

unofficial client library
Clojure

unofficial client library
Dart

unofficial client library
Erlang
Go

unofficial client library
Groovy

unofficial client library
Haskell

unofficial client library
Java
JavaScript

unofficial client library
Lisp

unofficial client library
Perl

unofficial client library
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scala

unofficial client library
Smalltalk

unofficial client library

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

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Erlang

yes

Triggers

yes

Domain Events

yes

pre-commit hooks and post-commit hooks

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

yes

horizontal partitioning

client side managed; servers are not synchronized

Sharding

no "single point of failure"

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Source-replica replication

selectable replication factor

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

depending on model

links between data sets can be stored

yes

Transaction concepts

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

yes

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

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

granular access controls, API key management, content filters

Role based authorization

yes, using Riak Security

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

Coveo announced its joining in the MACH Alliance
26 April 2024, Martechcube

AI for CX: Coveo's award-winning solution
17 April 2024, CMSWire

Coveo joins MACH Alliance to advocate open tech ecosystem
29 April 2024, IT Brief Australia

Coveo joins the MACH Alliance -
26 April 2024, Enterprise Times

How Coveo delivers better experiences with generative AI by partnering with CIOs
20 October 2023, Fast Company

provided by Google News

Basho Revamps Riak Open-Source Database
22 September 2023, InformationWeek

Basho, Maker of Riak NoSQL Database, Raises $25M
13 January 2015, Data Center Knowledge

A Critique of Resizable Hash Tables: Riak Core & Random Slicing
26 August 2018, InfoQ.com

Riak NoSQL snapped up by Bet365
12 September 2017, ComputerWeekly.com

NoSQL pioneer Basho stamps its mark on time stamp data with Riak TS
6 October 2015, The Register

provided by Google 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