DBMS > EJDB vs. Graph Engine vs. JaguarDB vs. MaxDB vs. Sequoiadb

System Properties Comparison EJDB vs. Graph Engine vs. JaguarDB vs. MaxDB vs. Sequoiadb

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

Performant, highly scalable DBMS for AI and IoT applications

A robust and reliable RDBMS optimized to run all major SAP solutions

NewSQL database with distributed OLTP and SQL

Primary database model

Document store

Graph DBMS
Key-value store

Key-value store
Vector DBMS

Relational DBMS

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	0.00
Rank	#383	Overall
	#60	Key-value stores
	#13	Vector DBMS

Score	2.32
Rank	#112	Overall
	#55	Relational DBMS

Score	0.45
Rank	#261	Overall
	#41	Document stores
	#122	Relational DBMS

Website

github.com/Softmotions/ejdb

Technical documentation

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

www.graphengine.io/docs/manual

www.jaguardb.com/support.html

maxdb.sap.com/documentation

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

Developer

Softmotions

Microsoft

DataJaguar, Inc.

SAP, acquired from Software AG (Adabas-D) in 1997

Sequoiadb Ltd.

Initial release

2012

2010

2015

1984

2013

Current release

3.3 July 2023

7.9.10.12, February 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

GPLv2

Open Source

MIT License

Open Source

GPL V3.0

commercial

Limited community edition free

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

C++

the server part. Clients available in other languages

C++

Server operating systems

server-less

.NET

Linux

AIX
HP-UX
Linux
Solaris
Windows

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

SQL

Support of SQL

A subset of ANSI SQL is implemented

but no views, foreign keys, triggers

yes

SQL-like query language

APIs and other access methods

in-process shared library

RESTful HTTP API

JDBC
ODBC

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
WebDAV

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
C++
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scala

.Net
C#
Java
Perl
PHP
Python

.Net
C++
Java
PHP
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

JavaScript

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

horizontal partitioning

Sharding

none

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

Multi-source replication

Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Eventual Consistency

Immediate Consistency

Eventual 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

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

rights management via user accounts

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

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
2 June 2023, 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

SAP Content Server High Availability using Amazon EFS and SUSE | Amazon Web Services
30 December 2020, AWS Blog

SAP Aligns Mainstream Maintenance Commitments Across Its Enterprise Solutions
11 August 2020, SAP News

SIOS looks to boost SAP HANA automated replication
29 March 2023, TechTarget

Alibaba Cloud Offers Access to SAP Software for Customers
5 June 2018, Alizila

Your SAP HANA Cheat Sheet: Milestones, Terms and More
14 May 2012, SiliconANGLE News

provided by Google News

Share this page