DBMS > EJDB vs. Graph Engine vs. MySQL vs. Sequoiadb

System Properties Comparison EJDB vs. Graph Engine vs. MySQL vs. Sequoiadb

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

Widely used open source RDBMS

NewSQL database with distributed OLTP and SQL

Primary database model

Document store

Graph DBMS
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Key/Value like access via memcached API

Document store
Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	0.30
Rank	#294	Overall
	#44	Document stores

Score	0.62
Rank	#240	Overall
	#21	Graph DBMS
	#35	Key-value stores

Score	1087.72
Rank	#2	Overall
	#2	Relational DBMS

Score	0.48
Rank	#260	Overall
	#41	Document stores
	#121	Relational DBMS

Website

github.com/Softmotions/ejdb

www.graphengine.io

www.mysql.com

www.sequoiadb.com

Technical documentation

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

www.graphengine.io/docs/manual

dev.mysql.com/doc

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

Developer

Softmotions

Microsoft

Oracle

since 2010, originally MySQL AB, then Sun

Sequoiadb Ltd.

Initial release

2012

2010

1995

2013

Current release

8.3.0, January 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

GPLv2

Open Source

MIT License

Open Source

GPL version 2. Commercial licenses with extended functionallity are 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.

Aiven for MySQL: Fully managed MySQL, deployable in the cloud of your choice, with seamless integrations and lightning-fast setup.

Implementation language

.NET and C

C and C++

C++

Server operating systems

server-less

.NET

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X
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.

yes

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

with proprietary extensions

SQL-like query language

APIs and other access methods

in-process shared library

RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
Proprietary native API

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

Ada
C
C#
C++
D
Delphi
Eiffel
Erlang
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scheme
Tcl

.Net
C++
Java
PHP
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

proprietary syntax

JavaScript

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

horizontal partitioning

horizontal partitioning, sharding with MySQL Cluster or MySQL Fabric

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

typically not needed, however similar functionality with collection joins possible

yes

not for MyISAM storage engine

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

not for MyISAM storage engine

Document is locked during a transaction

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Read/Write Locking

yes

table locks or row locks depending on storage engine

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

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

no user groups or roles

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.