DBMS > Dragonfly vs. Graph Engine vs. RavenDB

System Properties Comparison Dragonfly vs. Graph Engine vs. RavenDB

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

A distributed in-memory data processing engine, underpinned by a strongly-typed RAM store and a general distributed computation engine

Open Source Operational and Transactional Enterprise NoSQL Document Database

Primary database model

Key-value store

Graph DBMS
Key-value store

Document store

Secondary database models

Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS
Time Series DBMS

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

Score	0.42
Rank	#271	Overall
	#38	Key-value stores

Score	0.62
Rank	#240	Overall
	#21	Graph DBMS
	#35	Key-value stores

Score	3.01
Rank	#101	Overall
	#17	Document stores

Website

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

www.graphengine.io

ravendb.net

Technical documentation

www.dragonflydb.io/docs

www.graphengine.io/docs/manual

ravendb.net/docs

Developer

DragonflyDB team and community contributors

Microsoft

Hibernating Rhinos

Initial release

2023

2010

Current release

1.0, March 2023

5.4, July 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

BSL 1.1

Open Source

MIT License

Open Source

AGPL version 3, commercial license available

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++

.NET and C

Server operating systems

Linux

.NET

Linux
macOS
Raspberry Pi
Windows

Data scheme

scheme-free

yes

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

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

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

SQL-like query language (RQL)

APIs and other access methods

Proprietary protocol

RESP - REdis Serialization Protocol

RESTful HTTP API

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

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

C#
C++
F#
Visual Basic

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

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Lua

yes

Triggers

publish/subscribe channels provide some trigger functionality

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

horizontal partitioning

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Source-replica replication

Multi-source replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Eventual 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

Atomic execution of command blocks and scripts

ACID, Cluster-wide transaction available

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes, strict serializability by the server

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

optional: either by committing a write-ahead log (WAL) to the local persistent storage or by dumping the memory to a persistent 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

Password-based authentication

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.

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

Trinity
2 June 2023, Microsoft

Open source Microsoft Graph Engine takes on Neo4j
13 February 2017, InfoWorld

IBM releases Graph, a service that can outperform SQL databases
27 July 2016, GeekWire

How Google and Microsoft taught search to "understand" the Web
6 June 2012, Ars Technica

Aerospike Is Now a Graph Database, Too
21 June 2023, Datanami

provided by Google News

RavenDB Launches Version 6.0 Lightning Fast Queries, Data Integrations, Corax Indexing Engine, and Sharding
2 October 2023, PR Newswire

RavenDB Welcomes David Baruc as Chief Revenue Officer: Seasoned Tech Leader to Drive Global Sales and ...
13 June 2023, PR Newswire

Oren Eini on RavenDB, Including Consistency Guarantees and C# as the Implementation Language
23 May 2022, InfoQ.com

Install the NoSQL RavenDB Data System
14 May 2021, The New Stack

How I Created a RavenDB Python Client
23 September 2016, Visual Studio Magazine

provided by Google News

Share this page