DBMS > chDB vs. EJDB vs. Graph Engine vs. Heroic vs. IRONdb

System Properties Comparison chDB vs. EJDB vs. Graph Engine vs. Heroic vs. IRONdb

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

IRONdb seems to be discontinued. Therefore it is excluded from the DB-Engines Ranking.

Description

An embedded SQL OLAP Engine powered by ClickHouse

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

A distributed Time Series DBMS with a focus on scalability, fault tolerance and operational simplicity

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Document store

Graph DBMS
Key-value store

Time Series DBMS

Secondary database models

Time Series DBMS

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

Score	0.07
Rank	#376	Overall
	#158	Relational DBMS

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

Website

github.com/chdb-io/chdb

github.com/Softmotions/ejdb

www.graphengine.io

github.com/spotify/heroic

www.circonus.com/solutions/time-series-database/

Technical documentation

doc.chdb.io

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

www.graphengine.io/docs/manual

spotify.github.io/heroic

docs.circonus.com/irondb/category/getting-started

Developer

Softmotions

Microsoft

Spotify

Circonus LLC.

Initial release

2023

2012

2010

2014

2017

Current release

V0.10.20, January 2018

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

Open Source

GPLv2

Open Source

MIT License

Open Source

Apache 2.0

commercial

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 and C++

Server operating systems

server-less

.NET

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

text, numeric, histograms

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

SQL

Support of SQL

Close to ANSI SQL (SQL/JSON + extensions)

SQL-like query language (Circonus Analytics Query Language: CAQL)

APIs and other access methods

in-process shared library

RESTful HTTP API

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

HTTP API

Supported programming languages

Bun
C
C++
Go
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python
Rust

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

C#
C++
F#
Visual Basic

.Net
C
C++
Clojure
Erlang
Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript
JavaScript (Node.js)
Lisp
Lua
Perl
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Rust
Scala

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

yes, in Lua

Triggers

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

horizontal partitioning

Sharding

Automatic, metric affinity per node

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

yes

configurable replication factor, datacenter aware

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Immediate consistency per node, eventual consistency across nodes

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

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

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

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

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

provided by Google News

Application observability firm Apica buys telemetry data startup Circonus and adds more funding
21 February 2024, SiliconANGLE News

Apica Acquires Telemetry Data Management Pioneer Circonus And Lands New Funding
22 February 2024, Datanami

Apica gets $6 million in funding and buys Circonus -
21 February 2024, Enterprise Times

provided by Google News

Share this page