DBMS > Dgraph vs. Firebase Realtime Database vs. IBM Db2 Event Store vs. SQLite

System Properties Comparison Dgraph vs. Firebase Realtime Database vs. IBM Db2 Event Store vs. SQLite

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Distributed and scalable native Graph DBMS

Cloud-hosted realtime document store. iOS, Android, and JavaScript clients share one Realtime Database instance and automatically receive updates with the newest data.

Distributed Event Store optimized for Internet of Things use cases

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

Primary database model

Graph DBMS

Document store

Event Store
Time Series DBMS

Relational DBMS

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

Score	1.45
Rank	#156	Overall
	#15	Graph DBMS

Score	14.29
Rank	#39	Overall
	#6	Document stores

Score	0.19
Rank	#323	Overall
	#2	Event Stores
	#28	Time Series DBMS

Score	114.32
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Website

dgraph.io

firebase.google.com/products/realtime-database

www.ibm.com/products/db2-event-store

www.sqlite.org

Technical documentation

dgraph.io/docs

firebase.google.com/docs/database

www.ibm.com/docs/en/db2-event-store

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

Developer

Dgraph Labs, Inc.

Google

acquired by Google 2014

IBM

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Initial release

2016

2012

2017

2000

Current release

2.0

3.46.0 (23 May 2024), May 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache 2.0

commercial

free developer edition available

Open Source

Public Domain

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

C and C++

Server operating systems

Linux
OS X
Windows

hosted

Linux

Linux, macOS, Windows for the developer addition

server-less

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

dynamic column types

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

not rigid because of 'dynamic typing' concept.

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.

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

through the embedded Spark runtime

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

APIs and other access methods

GraphQL query language
gRPC (using protocol buffers) API
HTTP API

Android
iOS
JavaScript API
RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET
DB2 Connect
JDBC
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

Supported programming languages

C#
C++
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
Ruby

Java
JavaScript
Objective-C

C
C#
C++
Cobol
Delphi
Fortran
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Perl
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Scala
Visual Basic

Actionscript
Ada
Basic
C
C#
C++
D
Delphi
Forth
Fortran
Haskell
Java
JavaScript
Lisp
Lua
MatLab
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
PL/SQL
Python
R
Ruby
Scala
Scheme
Smalltalk
Tcl

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

limited functionality with using 'rules'

yes

Triggers

Callbacks are triggered when data changes

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

yes

Sharding

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Synchronous replication via Raft

Active-active shard replication

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency

if the client is offline
Immediate Consistency

if the client is online

Eventual Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

yes

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

No - written data is immutable

yes

via file-system locks

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

Yes - Synchronous writes to local disk combined with replication and asynchronous writes in parquet format to permanent shared storage

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

Planned for future releases

yes, based on authentication and database rules

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.