DBMS > DuckDB vs. EJDB vs. Oracle NoSQL vs. Transbase

System Properties Comparison DuckDB vs. EJDB vs. Oracle NoSQL vs. Transbase

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

An embeddable, in-process, column-oriented SQL OLAP RDBMS

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

A multi-model, scalable, distributed NoSQL database, designed to provide highly reliable, flexible, and available data management across a configurable set of storage nodes

A resource-optimized, high-performance, universally applicable RDBMS

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Document store

Document store
Key-value store
Relational DBMS

Relational DBMS

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

Score	4.57
Rank	#74	Overall
	#40	Relational DBMS

Score	0.27
Rank	#297	Overall
	#44	Document stores

Score	2.95
Rank	#100	Overall
	#17	Document stores
	#17	Key-value stores
	#50	Relational DBMS

Score	0.11
Rank	#341	Overall
	#150	Relational DBMS

Website

duckdb.org

github.com/Softmotions/ejdb

www.oracle.com/database/nosql/technologies/nosql

www.transaction.de/en/products/transbase.html

Technical documentation

duckdb.org/docs

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

docs.oracle.com/en/database/other-databases/nosql-database/index.html

www.transaction.de/en/products/transbase/features.html

Developer

Softmotions

Oracle

Transaction Software GmbH

Initial release

2018

2012

2011

1987

Current release

0.10, February 2024

23.3, December 2023

Transbase 8.3, 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

MIT License

Open Source

GPLv2

Open Source

Proprietary for Enterprise Edition (Oracle Database EE license has Oracle NoSQL database EE covered: details)

commercial

free development license

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++

Java

C and C++

Server operating systems

server-less

Linux
Solaris SPARC/x86

FreeBSD
Linux
macOS
Solaris
Windows

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

Support Fixed schema and Schema-less deployment with the ability to interoperate between them.

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

string, integer, double, bool, date, object_id

optional

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

SQL-like DML and DDL statements

yes

APIs and other access methods

Arrow Database Connectivity (ADBC)
CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

in-process shared library

RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
Proprietary native API

Supported programming languages

C
C#

3rd party driver
C++
Crystal

3rd party driver
Go

3rd party driver
Java
Lisp

3rd party driver
Python
R
Ruby

3rd party driver
Rust
Swift
Zig

3rd party driver

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

C
C#
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

C
C#
C++
Java
JavaScript
Kotlin
Objective-C
PHP
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

Electable source-replica replication per shard. Support distributed global deployment with Multi-region table feature

Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

with Hadoop integration

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

depending on configuration

Immediate Consistency

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

ACID

configurable

ACID within a storage node (=shard)

yes

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes, multi-version concurrency control (MVCC)

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

off heap cache

User concepts

Access control

Access rights for users and roles

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

DuckDB: The tiny but powerful analytics database
15 May 2024, InfoWorld

DuckDB Walks to the Beat of Its Own Analytics Drum
5 March 2024, Datanami

Enabling Remote Query Execution through DuckDB Extensions
12 March 2024, InfoQ.com

My First Billion (of Rows) in DuckDB | by João Pedro | May, 2024
1 May 2024, Towards Data Science

MotherDuck Raises $52.5 Million Series B Funding as DuckDB Adoption Soars
20 September 2023, PR Newswire

provided by Google News

OpenWorld 2013: Oracle NoSQL Database On the Rise?
13 December 2023, Channel Futures

Blog Theme - Details
21 August 2023, Oracle

Oracle Defends Relational DBs Against NoSQL Competitors
25 November 2015, eWeek

Oracle Adds New AI-Enabling Features To MySQL HeatWave
23 March 2023, Forbes

Cloud database comparison: AWS, Microsoft, Google and Oracle
23 August 2022, TechTarget

provided by Google News

Share this page