DBMS > EJDB vs. Infobright vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. Newts vs. Stardog

System Properties Comparison EJDB vs. Infobright vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. Newts vs. Stardog

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Embeddable document-store database library with JSON representation of queries (in MongoDB style)

High performant column-oriented DBMS for analytic workloads using MySQL or PostgreSQL as a frontend

A Wide Column Store for rapid development using massive semi-structured datasets

Time Series DBMS based on Cassandra

Enterprise Knowledge Graph platform and graph DBMS with high availability, high performance reasoning, and virtualization

Primary database model

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

Score	0.27
Rank	#297	Overall
	#44	Document stores

Score	0.96
Rank	#194	Overall
	#91	Relational DBMS

Score	4.48
Rank	#75	Overall
	#6	Wide column stores

Score	0.00
Rank	#383	Overall
	#41	Time Series DBMS

Score	2.02
Rank	#123	Overall
	#11	Graph DBMS
	#6	RDF stores

Website

github.com/Softmotions/ejdb

ignitetech.com/softwarelibrary/infobrightdb

azure.microsoft.com/en-us/services/storage/tables

opennms.github.io/newts

www.stardog.com

Technical documentation

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

github.com/OpenNMS/newts/wiki

docs.stardog.com

Developer

Softmotions

Ignite Technologies Inc.; formerly InfoBright Inc.

Microsoft

OpenNMS Group

Stardog-Union

Initial release

2012

2005

2012

2014

2010

Current release

7.3.0, May 2020

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

GPLv2

commercial

The open source (GPLv2) version did not support inserts/updates/deletes and was discontinued with July 2016

commercial

Open Source

Apache 2.0

commercial

60-day fully-featured trial license; 1-year fully-featured non-commercial use license for academics/students

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

Java

Server operating systems

server-less

Linux
Windows

hosted

Linux
OS X
Windows

Linux
macOS
Windows

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

schema-free

schema-free and OWL/RDFS-schema support

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.

Import/export of XML data possible

Secondary indexes

Knowledge Grid Technology used instead

yes

supports real-time indexing in full-text and geospatial

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

Yes, compatible with all major SQL variants through dedicated BI/SQL Server

APIs and other access methods

in-process shared library

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

RESTful HTTP API

HTTP REST
Java API

GraphQL query language
HTTP API
Jena RDF API
OWL
RDF4J API
Sesame REST HTTP Protocol
SNARL
SPARQL
Spring Data
Stardog Studio
TinkerPop 3

Supported programming languages

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

.Net
C
C#
C++
D
Eiffel
Erlang
Haskell
Java
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scheme
Tcl

.Net
C#
C++
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
Ruby

Java

.Net
Clojure
Groovy
Java
JavaScript
Python
Ruby

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions and aggregates, HTTP Server extensions in Java

Triggers

yes

via event handlers

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

Sharding

based on Cassandra

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

Source-replica replication

yes

implicit feature of the cloud service. Replication either local, cross-facility or geo-redundant.

selectable replication factor

based on Cassandra

Multi-source replication in HA-Cluster

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency

based on Cassandra
Immediate Consistency

based on Cassandra

Immediate Consistency in HA-Cluster

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

typically not needed, however similar functionality with collection joins possible

yes

relationships in graphs

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

optimistic locking

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

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

exploiting MySQL or PostgreSQL frontend capabilities

Access rights based on private key authentication or shared access signatures

Access rights for users and roles

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

Ignite Buys Database Vendor Infobright
2 May 2017, Datanami

provided by Google News

Working with Azure to Use and Manage Data Lakes
7 March 2024, Simplilearn

How to Use C# Azure.Data.Tables SDK with Azure Cosmos DB
9 July 2021, hackernoon.com

How to use Azure Table storage in .Net
14 January 2019, InfoWorld

Inside Azure File Storage
7 October 2015, Microsoft

How to write data to Azure Table Store with an Azure Function
14 April 2017, Experts Exchange

provided by Google News

Share this page