DBMS > Dgraph vs. HarperDB vs. RavenDB vs. RocksDB

System Properties Comparison Dgraph vs. HarperDB vs. RavenDB vs. RocksDB

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Distributed and scalable native Graph DBMS

Ultra-low latency distributed database with an intuitive REST API supporting NoSQL and SQL (including joins). Deployment of functions and databases simultaneously with a consolidated node-level architecture.

Open Source Operational and Transactional Enterprise NoSQL Document Database

Embeddable persistent key-value store optimized for fast storage (flash and RAM)

Primary database model

Graph DBMS

Document store

Key-value store

Secondary database models

Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS
Time Series DBMS

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

Score	1.53
Rank	#152	Overall
	#15	Graph DBMS

Score	0.60
Rank	#244	Overall
	#38	Document stores

Score	2.84
Rank	#101	Overall
	#18	Document stores

Score	3.41
Rank	#86	Overall
	#11	Key-value stores

Website

Technical documentation

dgraph.io/docs

docs.harperdb.io/docs

ravendb.net/docs

github.com/facebook/rocksdb/wiki

Developer

Dgraph Labs, Inc.

HarperDB

Hibernating Rhinos

Facebook, Inc.

Initial release

2016

2017

2010

2013

Current release

3.1, August 2021

5.4, July 2022

9.2.1, May 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache 2.0

commercial

free community edition available

Open Source

AGPL version 3, commercial license available

Open Source

BSD

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

Node.js

C++

Server operating systems

Linux
OS X
Windows

Linux
OS X

Linux
macOS
Raspberry Pi
Windows

Linux

Data scheme

schema-free

dynamic schema

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

JSON data types

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

SQL-like data manipulation statements

SQL-like query language (RQL)

APIs and other access methods

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

JDBC
ODBC
React Hooks
RESTful HTTP/JSON API
WebSocket

.NET Client API
F# Client API
Go Client API
Java Client API
NodeJS Client API
PHP Client API
Python Client API
RESTful HTTP API

C++ API
Java API

Supported programming languages

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

.Net
C
C#
C++
ColdFusion
D
Dart
Delphi
Erlang
Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Lisp
MatLab
Objective C
Perl
PHP
PowerShell
Prolog
Python
R
Ruby
Rust
Scala
Swift

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

C
C++
Go
Java
Perl
Python
Ruby

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Custom Functions

since release 3.1

yes

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

yes

A table resides as a whole on one (or more) nodes in a cluster

Sharding

horizontal partitioning

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Synchronous replication via Raft

yes

the nodes on which a table resides can be defined

Multi-source replication

yes

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Default ACID transactions on the local node (eventually consistent across the cluster). Atomic operations with cluster-wide ACID transactions. Eventual consistency for indexes and full-text search indexes.

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Atomic execution of specific operations

ACID, Cluster-wide transaction available

yes

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

yes, using LMDB

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

Access rights for users and roles

Authorization levels configured per client per database

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.