DBMS > Drizzle vs. EJDB vs. Postgres-XL vs. RavenDB

System Properties Comparison Drizzle vs. EJDB vs. Postgres-XL vs. RavenDB

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)

Based on PostgreSQL enhanced with MPP and write-scale-out cluster features

Open Source Operational and Transactional Enterprise NoSQL Document Database

Primary database model

Secondary database models

Document store
Spatial DBMS

Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS
Time Series DBMS

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

Score	0.27
Rank	#297	Overall
	#44	Document stores

Score	0.49
Rank	#256	Overall
	#117	Relational DBMS

Score	2.92
Rank	#101	Overall
	#18	Document stores

Website

github.com/Softmotions/ejdb

www.postgres-xl.org

ravendb.net

Technical documentation

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

www.postgres-xl.org/documentation

ravendb.net/docs

Developer

Drizzle project, originally started by Brian Aker

Softmotions

Hibernating Rhinos

Initial release

2008

2012

2014

since 2012, originally named StormDB

2010

Current release

7.2.4, September 2012

10 R1, October 2018

5.4, July 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

GNU GPL

Open Source

GPLv2

Open Source

Mozilla public 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++

Server operating systems

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X

server-less

Linux
macOS

Linux
macOS
Raspberry Pi
Windows

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

yes

schema-free

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

XML type, but no XML query functionality

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

with proprietary extensions

yes

distributed, parallel query execution

SQL-like query language (RQL)

APIs and other access methods

JDBC

in-process shared library

ADO.NET
JDBC
native C library
ODBC
streaming API for large objects

.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++
Java
PHP

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

.Net
C
C++
Delphi
Erlang
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Perl
PHP
Python
Tcl

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

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

yes

Triggers

hooks for callbacks inside the server can be used.

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

none

horizontal partitioning

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

none

Multi-source replication

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

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

MVCC

ACID, Cluster-wide transaction available

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.

User concepts

Access control

Pluggable authentication mechanisms

e.g. LDAP, HTTP

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

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

DB-Engines blog posts

MySQL won the April ranking; did its forks follow?
1 April 2015, Paul Andlinger

Has MySQL finally lost its mojo?
1 July 2013, Matthias Gelbmann

show all

Recent citations in the 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

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

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

RavenDB Adds Graph Queries
15 May 2019, Datanami

provided by Google News

Share this page