DBMS > Drizzle vs. EJDB vs. Microsoft SQL Server vs. OpenQM

System Properties Comparison Drizzle vs. EJDB vs. Microsoft SQL Server vs. OpenQM

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Drizzle has published its last release in September 2012. The open-source project is discontinued and Drizzle is excluded from the DB-Engines ranking.

Description

MySQL fork with a pluggable micro-kernel and with an emphasis of performance over compatibility.

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

Microsofts flagship relational DBMS

QpenQM is a high-performance, self-tuning, multi-value DBMS

Primary database model

Secondary database models

Document store
Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	0.27
Rank	#297	Overall
	#44	Document stores

Score	824.29
Rank	#3	Overall
	#3	Relational DBMS

Score	0.27
Rank	#298	Overall
	#10	Multivalue DBMS

Website

github.com/Softmotions/ejdb

www.microsoft.com/en-us/sql-server

www.rocketsoftware.com/products/rocket-multivalue-application-development-platform/rocket-open-qm

Technical documentation

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

learn.microsoft.com/en-US/sql/sql-server

Developer

Drizzle project, originally started by Brian Aker

Softmotions

Microsoft

Rocket Software, originally Martin Phillips

Initial release

2008

2012

1989

1993

Current release

7.2.4, September 2012

SQL Server 2022, November 2022

3.4-12

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

GNU GPL

Open Source

GPLv2

commercial

restricted free version is available

Open Source

GPLv2, extended 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++

Server operating systems

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X

server-less

Linux
Windows

AIX
FreeBSD
Linux
macOS
Raspberry Pi
Solaris
Windows

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

yes

with some exceptions

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

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.

yes

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

with proprietary extensions

yes

APIs and other access methods

JDBC

in-process shared library

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
OLE DB
Tabular Data Stream (TDS)

Supported programming languages

C
C++
Java
PHP

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

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

.Net
Basic
C
Java
Objective C
PHP
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Transact SQL, .NET languages, R, Python and (with SQL Server 2019) Java

yes

Triggers

hooks for callbacks inside the server can be used.

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

none

tables can be distributed across several files (horizontal partitioning); sharding through federation

yes

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

none

yes, but depending on the SQL-Server Edition

yes

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

typically not needed, however similar functionality with collection joins possible

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Read/Write Locking

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

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

Pluggable authentication mechanisms

e.g. LDAP, HTTP

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Access rights can be defined down to the item level

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.