DBMS > Dragonfly vs. ObjectBox vs. OrigoDB vs. SQLite vs. Trafodion

System Properties Comparison Dragonfly vs. ObjectBox vs. OrigoDB vs. SQLite vs. Trafodion

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Apache Trafodion has been retired in 2021. Therefore it is excluded from the DB-Engines Ranking.

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

Extremely fast embedded database for small devices, IoT and Mobile

A fully ACID in-memory object graph database

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

Transactional SQL-on-Hadoop DBMS

Primary database model

Key-value store

Object oriented DBMS

Document store
Object oriented DBMS

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Time Series DBMS

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

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

Score	1.29
Rank	#166	Overall
	#5	Object oriented DBMS

Score	0.06
Rank	#380	Overall
	#50	Document stores
	#18	Object oriented DBMS

Score	111.41
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Website

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

Technical documentation

www.dragonflydb.io/docs

docs.objectbox.io

origodb.com/docs

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

trafodion.apache.org/documentation.html

Developer

DragonflyDB team and community contributors

ObjectBox Limited

Robert Friberg et al

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Apache Software Foundation, originally developed by HP

Initial release

2023

2017

2009

under the name LiveDB

2000

2014

Current release

1.0, March 2023

3.46.0 (23 May 2024), May 2024

2.3.0, February 2019

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

BSL 1.1

Open Source

Apache License 2.0

Open Source

Public Domain

Open Source

Apache 2.0

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++

C and C++

C++, Java

Server operating systems

Linux

Android
iOS
Linux
macOS
Windows

Linux
Windows

server-less

Linux

Data scheme

scheme-free

yes

dynamic column types

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

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

yes

User defined using .NET types and collections

yes

not rigid because of 'dynamic typing' concept.

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

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

yes

APIs and other access methods

Proprietary protocol

RESP - REdis Serialization Protocol

Proprietary native API

.NET Client API
HTTP API
LINQ

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

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++
Dart
Go
Java
JavaScript

planned (as of Jan 2019)
Kotlin
Python

planned (as of Jan 2019)
Swift

.Net

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

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC/ADO.Net

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Lua

yes

Java Stored Procedures

Triggers

publish/subscribe channels provide some trigger functionality

yes

Domain Events

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

horizontal partitioning

client side managed; servers are not synchronized

none

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Source-replica replication

online/offline synchronization between client and server

Source-replica replication

none

yes, via HBase

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

via user defined functions and HBase

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Eventual Consistency

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

depending on model

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

via file-system locks

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

Password-based authentication

yes

Role based authorization

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

More information provided by the system vendor

News

The on-device Vector Database for Android and Java
29 May 2024

Vector search: making sense of search queries
29 May 2024

Python on-device Vector and Object Database for Local AI
28 May 2024

Evolution of search: traditional vs vector search
23 May 2024

On-device Vector Database for Dart/Flutter
21 May 2024

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.