DBMS > EJDB vs. Hawkular Metrics vs. OrigoDB vs. Teradata

System Properties Comparison EJDB vs. Hawkular Metrics vs. OrigoDB vs. Teradata

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)

Hawkular metrics is the metric storage of the Red Hat sponsored Hawkular monitoring system. It is based on Cassandra.

A fully ACID in-memory object graph database

A hybrid cloud data analytics software platform (Teradata Vantage)

Primary database model

Document store

Time Series DBMS

Document store
Object oriented DBMS

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS
Time Series DBMS

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

Score	0.31
Rank	#296	Overall
	#44	Document stores

Score	0.08
Rank	#366	Overall
	#39	Time Series DBMS

Score	0.06
Rank	#380	Overall
	#50	Document stores
	#19	Object oriented DBMS

Score	44.87
Rank	#22	Overall
	#15	Relational DBMS

Website

github.com/Softmotions/ejdb

www.hawkular.org

origodb.com

www.teradata.com

Technical documentation

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

www.hawkular.org/hawkular-metrics/docs/user-guide

origodb.com/docs

docs.teradata.com

Developer

Softmotions

Community supported by Red Hat

Robert Friberg et al

Teradata

Initial release

2012

2014

2009

under the name LiveDB

1984

Current release

Teradata Vantage 1.0 MU2, January 2019

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

GPLv2

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

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

Java

Server operating systems

server-less

Linux
OS X
Windows

Linux
Windows

hosted
Linux

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

string, integer, double, bool, date, object_id

yes

User defined using .NET types and collections

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.

can be achieved using .NET

yes

Secondary indexes

yes

Join-index to prejoin tables, aggregate index, sparse index, hash index

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

SQL 2016 + extensions

APIs and other access methods

in-process shared library

HTTP REST

.NET Client API
HTTP API
LINQ

.NET Client API
HTTP REST
JDBC
JMS Adapter
ODBC
OLE DB

Supported programming languages

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

Go
Java
Python
Ruby

.Net

C
C++
Cobol
Java (JDBC-ODBC)
Perl
PL/1
Python
R
Ruby

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

UDFs, stored procedures, table functions in parallel

Triggers

yes

via Hawkular Alerting

yes

Domain Events

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

based on Cassandra

horizontal partitioning

client side managed; servers are not synchronized

Sharding

Hashing

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

selectable replication factor

based on Cassandra

Source-replica replication

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

based on Cassandra
Immediate Consistency

based on Cassandra

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

typically not needed, however similar functionality with collection joins possible

depending on model

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Read/Write Locking

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

Write ahead log

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

Role based authorization

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

DB-Engines blog posts

Teradata is the most popular data warehouse DBMS
2 April 2013, Paul Andlinger

show all

Recent citations in the news

Waiting for Red Hat OpenShift 4.0? Too late, 4.1 has already arrived… • DEVCLASS
5 June 2019, DevClass

provided by Google News

Teradata Co. (NYSE:TDC) Given Average Rating of “Hold” by Analysts
16 June 2024, Defense World

TERADATA ALERT: Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C. Announces that a Class Action Lawsuit Has Been Filed Against ...
15 June 2024, GlobeNewswire

SHAREHOLDER ALERT: Pomerantz Law Firm Reminds Shareholders with Losses on their Investment in Teradata ...
15 June 2024, PR Newswire

Teradata Stock: Much More Enticing Now Than Last Year, But Uncertainty Lingers (NYSE:TDC)
14 June 2024, Seeking Alpha

Is There Now An Opportunity In Teradata Corporation (NYSE:TDC)?
11 June 2024, Simply Wall St

provided by Google News

Share this page