DBMS > EJDB vs. Hazelcast vs. Oracle Berkeley DB vs. SAP HANA

System Properties Comparison EJDB vs. Hazelcast vs. Oracle Berkeley DB vs. SAP HANA

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 widely adopted in-memory data grid

Widely used in-process key-value store

In-memory, column based data store. Available as appliance or cloud service

Primary database model

Document store

Key-value store

supports sorted and unsorted key sets
Native XML DBMS

in the Oracle Berkeley DB XML version

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store

JSON support with IMDG 3.12

Document store
Graph DBMS

with SAP Hana, Enterprise Edition
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	0.13
Rank	#331	Overall
	#46	Document stores

Score	5.72
Rank	#59	Overall
	#6	Key-value stores

Score	1.88
Rank	#130	Overall
	#23	Key-value stores
	#3	Native XML DBMS

Score	41.32
Rank	#23	Overall
	#16	Relational DBMS

Website

github.com/Softmotions/ejdb

hazelcast.com

www.oracle.com/database/technologies/related/berkeleydb.html

www.sap.com/products/hana.html

Technical documentation

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

hazelcast.org/imdg/docs

docs.oracle.com/cd/E17076_05/html/index.html

help.sap.com/hana

Developer

Softmotions

Hazelcast

Oracle

originally developed by Sleepycat, which was acquired by Oracle

SAP

Initial release

2012

2008

1994

2010

Current release

5.3.6, November 2023

18.1.40, May 2020

2.0 SPS07 (April 4, 2023), April 2023

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

GPLv2

Open Source

Apache Version 2; commercial licenses available

Open Source

commercial license available

commercial

Cloud-based only

Only available as a cloud service

also available as a cloud based service

DBaaS offerings (sponsored links)

Database as a Service

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

Implementation language

Java

C, Java, C++ (depending on the Berkeley DB edition)

Server operating systems

server-less

All OS with a Java VM

AIX
Android
FreeBSD
iOS
Linux
OS X
Solaris
VxWorks
Windows

Appliance or cloud-service

Data scheme

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

the object must implement a serialization strategy

yes

only with the Berkeley DB XML edition

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language

yes

SQL interfaced based on SQLite is available

yes

APIs and other access methods

in-process shared library

JCache
JPA
Memcached protocol
RESTful HTTP API

JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

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

.Net
C#
C++
Clojure
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python
Scala

.Net

Figaro is a .Net framework assembly that extends Berkeley DB XML into an embeddable database engine for .NET
others

Third-party libraries to manipulate Berkeley DB files are available for many languages
C
C#
C++
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)

3rd party binding
Perl
Python
Tcl

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Event Listeners, Executor Services

SQLScript, R

Triggers

yes

Events

yes

only for the SQL API

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

none

yes

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

yes

Replicated Map

Source-replica replication

yes

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency selectable by user

Raft Consensus Algorithm

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

one or two-phase-commit; repeatable reads; read commited

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Read/Write Locking

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

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 access control

yes

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.