DBMS > EJDB vs. Graph Engine vs. Postgres-XL vs. TempoIQ vs. Yaacomo

System Properties Comparison EJDB vs. Graph Engine vs. Postgres-XL vs. TempoIQ vs. Yaacomo

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

TempoIQ seems to be decommissioned. It will be removed from the DB-Engines ranking.

Yaacomo seems to be discontinued 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

Based on PostgreSQL enhanced with MPP and write-scale-out cluster features

Scalable analytics DBMS for sensor data, provided as a service (SaaS)

OpenCL based in-memory RDBMS, designed for efficiently utilizing the hardware via parallel computing

Primary database model

Document store

Graph DBMS
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Time Series DBMS

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Spatial 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	0.49
Rank	#256	Overall
	#117	Relational DBMS

Website

github.com/Softmotions/ejdb

www.graphengine.io

www.postgres-xl.org

tempoiq.com (offline)

yaacomo.com

Technical documentation

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

www.graphengine.io/docs/manual

www.postgres-xl.org/documentation

Developer

Softmotions

Microsoft

TempoIQ

Q2WEB GmbH

Initial release

2012

2010

2014

since 2012, originally named StormDB

2012

2009

Current release

10 R1, October 2018

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

GPLv2

Open Source

MIT License

Open Source

Mozilla public license

commercial

Cloud-based only

Only available as a cloud service

yes

DBaaS offerings (sponsored links)

Database as a Service

Providers of DBaaS offerings, please contact us to be listed.

Implementation language

.NET and C

Server operating systems

server-less

.NET

Linux
macOS

Android
Linux
Windows

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

string, integer, double, bool, date, object_id

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.

yes

XML type, but no XML query functionality

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

distributed, parallel query execution

yes

APIs and other access methods

in-process shared library

RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET
JDBC
native C library
ODBC
streaming API for large objects

HTTP API

JDBC
ODBC

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++
Delphi
Erlang
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Perl
PHP
Python
Tcl

C#
Java
JavaScript

Node.js
Python
Ruby

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

user defined functions

Triggers

yes

Realtime Alerts

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

horizontal partitioning

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

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

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

MVCC

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

In-memory capabilities

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

yes

User concepts

Access control

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

simple authentication-based access control

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

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

How Google and Microsoft taught search to "understand" the Web
6 June 2012, Ars Technica

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

provided by Google News

Share this page