DBMS > EJDB vs. EsgynDB vs. Tarantool vs. TinkerGraph

System Properties Comparison EJDB vs. EsgynDB vs. Tarantool vs. TinkerGraph

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

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

Enterprise-class SQL-on-Hadoop solution, powered by Apache Trafodion

In-memory computing platform with a flexible data schema for efficiently building high-performance applications

A lightweight, in-memory graph engine that serves as a reference implementation of the TinkerPop3 API

Primary database model

Document store

Relational DBMS

Document store
Key-value store
Relational DBMS

Graph DBMS

Secondary database models

Spatial DBMS

with Tarantool/GIS extension

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

Score	0.27
Rank	#297	Overall
	#44	Document stores

Score	0.16
Rank	#329	Overall
	#146	Relational DBMS

Score	1.72
Rank	#144	Overall
	#25	Document stores
	#25	Key-value stores
	#66	Relational DBMS

Score	0.08
Rank	#348	Overall
	#35	Graph DBMS

Website

github.com/Softmotions/ejdb

www.esgyn.cn

www.tarantool.io

tinkerpop.apache.org/docs/current/reference/#tinkergraph-gremlin

Technical documentation

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

www.tarantool.io/en/doc

Developer

Softmotions

Esgyn

Initial release

2012

2015

2008

2009

Current release

2.10.0, May 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

GPLv2

commercial

Open Source

BSD-2, source-available extensions (modules), commercial licenses for Tarantool Enterprise

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++, Java

C and C++

Java

Server operating systems

server-less

Linux

BSD
Linux
macOS

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

Flexible data schema: relational definition for tables with ability to store json-like documents in columns

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

string, integer, double, bool, date, object_id

yes

string, double, decimal, uuid, integer, blob, boolean, datetime

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

Full-featured ANSI SQL support

APIs and other access methods

in-process shared library

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

Open binary protocol

TinkerPop 3

Supported programming languages

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

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC/ADO.Net

C
C#
C++
Erlang
Go
Java
JavaScript
Lua
Perl
PHP
Python
Rust

Groovy
Java

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Java Stored Procedures

Lua, C and SQL stored procedures

Triggers

yes, before/after data modification events, on replication events, client session events

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

Sharding, partitioned with virtual buckets by user defined affinity key. Live resharding for scale up and scale down without maintenance downtime.

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

Multi-source replication between multi datacenters

Asynchronous replication with multi-master option
Configurable replication topology (full-mesh, chain, star)
Synchronous quorum replication (with Raft)

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Casual consistency across sharding partitions
Eventual consistency within replicaset partition

when using asyncronous replication
Immediate Consistency within single instance
Sequential consistency including linearizable read within replicaset partition

when using Raft

none

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

typically not needed, however similar functionality with collection joins possible

yes

Relationships in graphs

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

ACID, with serializable isolation and linearizable read (within partition); Configurable MVCC (within partition); No cross-shard distributed transactions

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Read/Write Locking

yes

yes, cooperative multitasking

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

yes, write ahead logging

optional

In-memory capabilities

Is there an option to define some or all structures to be held in-memory only.

yes, full featured in-memory storage engine with persistence

yes

User concepts

Access control

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Access Control Lists
Mutual TLS authentication for Tarantol Enterprise
Password based authentication
Role-based access control (RBAC) and LDAP for Tarantol Enterprise
Users and Roles

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

Data processing speed and reliability: in-memory synchronous replication
9 November 2021, Vladimir Perepelytsya, Tarantool (sponsor)

show all

Recent citations in the news

TaranHouse: New Big Data Warehouse Announced by Tarantool
4 April 2018, Newswire

In-Memory Showdown: Redis vs. Tarantool
4 April 2023, Хабр

Deploying Tarantool Cartridge applications with zero effort (Part 1)
16 December 2019, Хабр

Deploying Tarantool Cartridge applications with zero effort (Part 2)
13 April 2020, Хабр

Тarantool Cartridge: Sharding Lua Backend in Three Lines
9 October 2019, Хабр

provided by Google News

Automated testing of Amazon Neptune data access with Apache TinkerPop Gremlin | Amazon Web Services
28 September 2022, AWS Blog

Simple Deployment of a Graph Database: JanusGraph | by Edward Elson Kosasih
12 October 2020, Towards Data Science

Why developers like Apache TinkerPop, an open source framework for graph computing | Amazon Web Services
27 September 2021, AWS Blog

InfiniteGraph Gets Support for Common Graph Database Language and More
21 February 2012, SiliconANGLE News

Introducing Gremlin query hints for Amazon Neptune | AWS Database Blog
26 February 2019, AWS Blog

provided by Google News

Share this page