DBMS > EJDB vs. HarperDB vs. mSQL vs. OpenQM

System Properties Comparison EJDB vs. HarperDB vs. mSQL vs. OpenQM

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)

Ultra-low latency distributed database with an intuitive REST API supporting NoSQL and SQL (including joins). Deployment of functions and databases simultaneously with a consolidated node-level architecture.

mSQL (Mini SQL) is a simple and lightweight RDBMS

QpenQM is a high-performance, self-tuning, multi-value DBMS

Primary database model

Document store

Relational DBMS

Multivalue DBMS

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

Score	0.27
Rank	#297	Overall
	#44	Document stores

Score	0.55
Rank	#248	Overall
	#38	Document stores

Score	1.27
Rank	#167	Overall
	#77	Relational DBMS

Score	0.27
Rank	#298	Overall
	#10	Multivalue DBMS

Website

github.com/Softmotions/ejdb

www.harperdb.io

hughestech.com.au/products/msql

www.rocketsoftware.com/products/rocket-multivalue-application-development-platform/rocket-open-qm

Technical documentation

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

docs.harperdb.io/docs

Developer

Softmotions

HarperDB

Hughes Technologies

Rocket Software, originally Martin Phillips

Initial release

2012

2017

1994

1993

Current release

3.1, August 2021

4.4, October 2021

3.4-12

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

GPLv2

commercial

free community edition available

commercial

free licenses can be provided

Open Source

GPLv2, extended commercial license available

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

Node.js

Server operating systems

server-less

Linux
OS X

AIX
HP-UX
Linux
OS X
Solaris SPARC/x86
Windows

AIX
FreeBSD
Linux
macOS
Raspberry Pi
Solaris
Windows

Data scheme

schema-free

dynamic schema

yes

with some exceptions

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

string, integer, double, bool, date, object_id

yes

JSON data types

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

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like data manipulation statements

A subset of ANSI SQL is implemented

no subqueries, aggregate functions, views, foreign keys, triggers

APIs and other access methods

in-process shared library

JDBC
ODBC
React Hooks
RESTful HTTP/JSON API
WebSocket

JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

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

.Net
C
C#
C++
ColdFusion
D
Dart
Delphi
Erlang
Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Lisp
MatLab
Objective C
Perl
PHP
PowerShell
Prolog
Python
R
Ruby
Rust
Scala
Swift

C
C++
Delphi
Java
Perl
PHP
Tcl

.Net
Basic
C
Java
Objective C
PHP
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Custom Functions

since release 3.1

yes

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

A table resides as a whole on one (or more) nodes in a cluster

none

yes

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

yes

the nodes on which a table resides can be defined

none

yes

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

none

Immediate 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

Atomic execution of specific operations

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Read/Write Locking

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

yes, using LMDB

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

Access rights for users and roles

Access rights can be defined down to the item level

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

Startups of the Year 2023: Meet HarperDB - A Database and Application Development Platform
22 June 2023, hackernoon.com

Unlocking immersive golfing experiences with AWS Wavelength | Amazon Web Services
29 November 2022, AWS Blog

HarperDB: An underdog SQL / NoSQL database
7 February 2018, ZDNet

HarperDB is More Than Just a Database: Here's Why
21 August 2021, hackernoon.com

Stephen Goldberg Named 2023 Bill Daniels Ethical Leader of the Year | CU Denver Business School News
9 January 2023, business-news.ucdenver.edu

provided by Google News

Make Your MySQL Server More Secure With These 7 Steps - MUO
1 December 2022, MakeUseOf

Writing a Web Service in Perl
9 July 2003, PCQuest

Higher Education PS rules out ghost students before PAC - Zambia
29 November 2018, diggers.news

provided by Google News

Share this page