DBMS > EJDB vs. Graph Engine vs. Heroic vs. Hypertable vs. Sequoiadb

System Properties Comparison EJDB vs. Graph Engine vs. Heroic vs. Hypertable vs. Sequoiadb

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Hypertable has stopped its further development with March 2016 and is removed from the DB-Engines ranking.

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

Time Series DBMS built at Spotify based on Cassandra or Google Cloud Bigtable, and ElasticSearch

An open source BigTable implementation based on distributed file systems such as Hadoop

NewSQL database with distributed OLTP and SQL

Primary database model

Document store

Graph DBMS
Key-value store

Time Series DBMS

Wide column store

Document store
Relational DBMS

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

Score	0.31
Rank	#296	Overall
	#44	Document stores

Score	0.67
Rank	#232	Overall
	#21	Graph DBMS
	#34	Key-value stores

Score	0.46
Rank	#265	Overall
	#22	Time Series DBMS

Score	0.50
Rank	#258	Overall
	#41	Document stores
	#120	Relational DBMS

Website

github.com/Softmotions/ejdb

www.graphengine.io

github.com/spotify/heroic

www.sequoiadb.com

Technical documentation

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

www.graphengine.io/docs/manual

spotify.github.io/heroic

www.sequoiadb.com/en/index.php?m=Files&a=index

Developer

Softmotions

Microsoft

Spotify

Hypertable Inc.

Sequoiadb Ltd.

Initial release

2012

2010

2014

2009

2013

Current release

0.9.8.11, March 2016

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

GPLv2

Open Source

MIT License

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

GNU version 3. Commercial license available

Open Source

Server: AGPL; Client: Apache V2

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

Java

C++

Server operating systems

server-less

.NET

Linux
OS X
Windows

an inofficial Windows port is available

Linux

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

string, integer, double, bool, date, object_id

yes

oid, date, timestamp, binary, regex

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

via Elasticsearch

restricted

only exact value or prefix value scans

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language

APIs and other access methods

in-process shared library

RESTful HTTP API

HQL (Heroic Query Language, a JSON-based language)
HTTP API

C++ API
Thrift

proprietary protocol using JSON

Supported programming languages

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

C#
C++
F#
Visual Basic

C++
Java
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby

.Net
C++
Java
PHP
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

JavaScript

Triggers

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

horizontal partitioning

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

yes

selectable replication factor on file system level

Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

typically not needed, however similar functionality with collection joins possible

Transaction concepts

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

Document is locked during a transaction

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

In-memory capabilities

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

yes

User concepts

Access control

simple password-based access control

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
30 October 2010, microsoft.com

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

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

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

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

provided by Google News

Review: Google Bigtable scales with ease
7 September 2016, InfoWorld

provided by Google News

TimescaleDB goes distributed; implements ‘Chunking’ over ‘Sharding’ for scaling-out
22 August 2019, Packt Hub

SQL and TimescaleDB. This article takes a closer look into… | by Alibaba Cloud
31 July 2019, DataDrivenInvestor

Decorate your Windows XP with Hyperdesk
30 July 2008, CNET

The Collective: Customize Your Computer & Your Phone With Star Trek
18 March 2009, TrekMovie

NoSQL Market: A well-defined technological growth map with an impact-analysis
19 June 2020, Inter Press Service

provided by Google News

Share this page