DBMS > EJDB vs. IBM Db2 vs. Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB vs. OrigoDB

System Properties Comparison EJDB vs. IBM Db2 vs. Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB vs. OrigoDB

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)

Common in IBM host environments, 2 different versions for host and Windows/Linux

Globally distributed, horizontally scalable, multi-model database service

A fully ACID in-memory object graph database

Primary database model

Document store

Relational DBMS

Since Version 10.5 support for JSON/BSON documents compatible with MongoDB

Document store
Graph DBMS
Key-value store
Wide column store

Document store
Object oriented DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
RDF store

in Db2 LUW (Linux, Unix, Windows)
Spatial DBMS

with Db2 Spatial Extender

Spatial DBMS

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

Score	0.13
Rank	#331	Overall
	#46	Document stores

Score	123.05
Rank	#9	Overall
	#6	Relational DBMS

Score	24.97
Rank	#27	Overall
	#4	Document stores
	#2	Graph DBMS
	#3	Key-value stores
	#3	Wide column stores

Score	0.00
Rank	#385	Overall
	#54	Document stores
	#21	Object oriented DBMS

Website

github.com/Softmotions/ejdb

www.ibm.com/products/db2

azure.microsoft.com/services/cosmos-db

origodb.com

Technical documentation

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

www.ibm.com/docs/en/db2

learn.microsoft.com/azure/cosmos-db

origodb.com/docs

Developer

Softmotions

IBM

Microsoft

Robert Friberg et al

Initial release

2012

1983

host version

2014

2009

under the name LiveDB

Current release

12.1, October 2016

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

GPLv2

commercial

free version is available

commercial

Open Source

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

C and C++

Server operating systems

server-less

AIX
HP-UX
Linux
Solaris
Windows
z/OS

hosted

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

JSON types

User defined using .NET types and collections

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

Secondary indexes

yes

All properties auto-indexed by default

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

SQL-like query language

APIs and other access methods

in-process shared library

ADO.NET
JDBC
JSON style queries

MongoDB compatible
ODBC
XQuery

DocumentDB API
Graph API (Gremlin)
MongoDB API
RESTful HTTP API
Table API

.NET Client API
HTTP API
LINQ

Supported programming languages

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

C
C#
C++
Cobol
Delphi
Fortran
Java
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby
Visual Basic

.Net
C#
Java
JavaScript
JavaScript (Node.js)
MongoDB client drivers written for various programming languages
Python

.Net

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

JavaScript

yes

Triggers

yes

JavaScript

yes

Domain Events

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

only with Windows/Unix/Linux Version

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

horizontal partitioning

client side managed; servers are not synchronized

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

yes

with separate tools (MQ, InfoSphere)

yes

Implicit feature of the cloud service

Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

with Hadoop integration

Integration with Hadoop/HDInsight on Azure*

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Bounded Staleness
Consistent Prefix
Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Consistency level configurable on request level
Session Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

typically not needed, however similar functionality with collection joins possible

yes

depending on model

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Multi-item ACID transactions with snapshot isolation within a partition

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Read/Write Locking

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

Write ahead log

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

Access rights can be defined down to the item level

Role based authorization

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.