DBMS > Dragonfly vs. EJDB vs. Netezza vs. TimesTen

System Properties Comparison Dragonfly vs. EJDB vs. Netezza vs. TimesTen

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

A drop-in Redis replacement that scales vertically to support millions of operations per second and terabyte sized workloads, all on a single instance

Embeddable document-store database library with JSON representation of queries (in MongoDB style)

Data warehouse and analytics appliance part of IBM PureSystems

In-Memory RDBMS compatible to Oracle

Primary database model

Key-value store

Document store

Relational DBMS

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

Score	0.49
Rank	#261	Overall
	#38	Key-value stores

Score	0.31
Rank	#296	Overall
	#44	Document stores

Score	8.59
Rank	#45	Overall
	#29	Relational DBMS

Score	1.36
Rank	#161	Overall
	#75	Relational DBMS

Website

github.com/dragonflydb/dragonfly
www.dragonflydb.io

github.com/Softmotions/ejdb

www.ibm.com/products/netezza

www.oracle.com/database/technologies/related/timesten.html

Technical documentation

www.dragonflydb.io/docs

github.com/Softmotions/ejdb/blob/master/README.md

docs.oracle.com/database/timesten-18.1

Developer

DragonflyDB team and community contributors

Softmotions

IBM

Oracle, TimesTen Performance Software, HP

originally founded in HP Labs it was acquired by Oracle in 2005

Initial release

2023

2012

2000

1998

Current release

1.0, March 2023

11 Release 2 (11.2.2.8.0)

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

BSL 1.1

Open Source

GPLv2

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

C++

Server operating systems

Linux

server-less

Linux

included in appliance

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

Data scheme

scheme-free

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

strings, hashes, lists, sets, sorted sets, bit arrays

yes

string, integer, double, bool, date, object_id

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.

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

APIs and other access methods

Proprietary protocol

RESP - REdis Serialization Protocol

in-process shared library

JDBC
ODBC
OLE DB

JDBC
ODBC
ODP.NET
Oracle Call Interface (OCI)

Supported programming languages

C
C#
C++
Clojure
D
Dart
Elixir
Erlang
Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Lisp
Lua
Objective-C
Perl
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Rust
Scala
Swift
Tcl

Actionscript
C
C#
C++
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Lua
Objective-C
Pike
Python
Ruby

C
C++
Fortran
Java
Lua
Perl
Python
R

C
C++
Java
PL/SQL

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Lua

yes

PL/SQL

Triggers

publish/subscribe channels provide some trigger functionality

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Source-replica replication

none

Source-replica replication

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Eventual Consistency

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

typically not needed, however similar functionality with collection joins possible

yes

Transaction concepts

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

Atomic execution of command blocks and scripts

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes, strict serializability by the server

yes

Read/Write Locking

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

by means of logfiles and checkpoints

In-memory capabilities

Is there an option to define some or all structures to be held in-memory only.

yes

User concepts

Access control

Password-based authentication

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

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

DragonflyDB Announces $21m in New Funding and General Availability
21 March 2023, Business Wire

DragonflyDB reels in $21M for its speedy in-memory database
21 March 2023, SiliconANGLE News

DragonflyDB Raises $21M in Funding
21 March 2023, FinSMEs

Dragonfly 1.0 Released For What Claims To Be The World's Fastest In-Memory Data Store
20 March 2023, Phoronix

Intel Linux Kernel Optimizations Show Huge Benefit For High Core Count Servers
29 March 2023, Phoronix

provided by Google News

Roundup: Telehouse, Cloudera, Netezza, EMC
31 May 2024, Data Center Knowledge

IBM announces availability of the high-performance, cloud-native Netezza Performance Server as a Service on AWS
11 July 2023, IBM

AWS and IBM Netezza come out in support of Iceberg in table format face-off
1 August 2023, The Register

How to migrate a large data warehouse from IBM Netezza to Amazon Redshift with no downtime | Amazon Web Services
21 August 2019, AWS Blog

IBM Brings Back a Netezza, Attacks Yellowbrick
29 June 2020, Datanami

provided by Google News

Share this page