DBMS > EJDB vs. Graph Engine vs. HarperDB vs. Lovefield

System Properties Comparison EJDB vs. Graph Engine vs. HarperDB vs. Lovefield

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)

A distributed in-memory data processing engine, underpinned by a strongly-typed RAM store and a general distributed computation engine

Ultra-low latency distributed database with an intuitive REST API supporting NoSQL and SQL (including joins). Deployment of functions and databases simultaneously with a consolidated node-level architecture.

Embeddable relational database for web apps written in pure JavaScript

Primary database model

Document store

Graph DBMS
Key-value store

Document store

Relational DBMS

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

Score	0.27
Rank	#297	Overall
	#44	Document stores

Score	0.61
Rank	#240	Overall
	#21	Graph DBMS
	#35	Key-value stores

Score	0.55
Rank	#248	Overall
	#38	Document stores

Score	0.29
Rank	#293	Overall
	#133	Relational DBMS

Website

github.com/Softmotions/ejdb

www.graphengine.io

www.harperdb.io

google.github.io/lovefield

Technical documentation

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

www.graphengine.io/docs/manual

docs.harperdb.io/docs

github.com/google/lovefield/blob/master/docs/spec_index.md

Developer

Softmotions

Microsoft

HarperDB

Google

Initial release

2012

2010

2017

2014

Current release

3.1, August 2021

2.1.12, February 2017

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

GPLv2

Open Source

MIT License

commercial

free community edition available

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

.NET and C

Node.js

JavaScript

Server operating systems

server-less

.NET

Linux
OS X

server-less, requires a JavaScript environment (browser, Node.js)

tested with Chrome, Firefox, IE, Safari

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

dynamic schema

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

string, integer, double, bool, date, object_id

yes

JSON data types

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

SQL-like data manipulation statements

SQL-like query language

via JavaScript builder pattern

APIs and other access methods

in-process shared library

RESTful HTTP API

JDBC
ODBC
React Hooks
RESTful HTTP/JSON API
WebSocket

Supported programming languages

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

C#
C++
F#
Visual Basic

.Net
C
C#
C++
ColdFusion
D
Dart
Delphi
Erlang
Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Lisp
MatLab
Objective C
Perl
PHP
PowerShell
Prolog
Python
R
Ruby
Rust
Scala
Swift

JavaScript

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Custom Functions

since release 3.1

Triggers

Using read-only observers

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

horizontal partitioning

A table resides as a whole on one (or more) nodes in a cluster

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

yes

the nodes on which a table resides can be defined

none

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

typically not needed, however similar functionality with collection joins possible

yes

Transaction concepts

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

Atomic execution of specific operations

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Read/Write Locking

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

optional: either by committing a write-ahead log (WAL) to the local persistent storage or by dumping the memory to a persistent storage

yes, using LMDB

yes, by using IndexedDB or the cloud service Firebase Realtime Database

In-memory capabilities

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

yes

using MemoryDB

User concepts

Access control

Access rights for 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

Recent citations in the news

Trinity
2 June 2023, microsoft.com

Open source Microsoft Graph Engine takes on Neo4j
13 February 2017, InfoWorld

IBM releases Graph, a service that can outperform SQL databases
27 July 2016, GeekWire

Aerospike Is Now a Graph Database, Too
21 June 2023, Datanami

The graph analytics landscape 2019 - DataScienceCentral.com
27 February 2019, Data Science Central

provided by Google News

Meet HarperDB, Winner of the Startups of the Year in Denver
9 February 2024, hackernoon.com

Startups of the Year 2023: Meet HarperDB - A Database and Application Development Platform
22 June 2023, hackernoon.com

Unlocking immersive golfing experiences with AWS Wavelength | Amazon Web Services
29 November 2022, AWS Blog

Stephen Goldberg Named 2023 Bill Daniels Ethical Leader of the Year | CU Denver Business School News
9 January 2023, business-news.ucdenver.edu

HarperDB: An underdog SQL / NoSQL database | ZDNET
7 February 2018, ZDNet

provided by Google News

Share this page