DBMS > EJDB vs. etcd vs. Lovefield vs. OrigoDB vs. Sequoiadb

System Properties Comparison EJDB vs. etcd vs. Lovefield vs. OrigoDB vs. Sequoiadb

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

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

A distributed reliable key-value store

Embeddable relational database for web apps written in pure JavaScript

A fully ACID in-memory object graph database

NewSQL database with distributed OLTP and SQL

Primary database model

Document store

Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Document store
Object oriented DBMS

Document store
Relational DBMS

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

Score	0.31
Rank	#296	Overall
	#44	Document stores

Score	7.03
Rank	#54	Overall
	#5	Key-value stores

Score	0.33
Rank	#286	Overall
	#131	Relational DBMS

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

Score	0.50
Rank	#258	Overall
	#41	Document stores
	#120	Relational DBMS

Website

github.com/Softmotions/ejdb

etcd.io
github.com/etcd-io/etcd

google.github.io/lovefield

origodb.com

www.sequoiadb.com

Technical documentation

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

etcd.io/docs
github.com/etcd-io/etcd/tree/master/Documentation

github.com/google/lovefield/blob/master/docs/spec_index.md

origodb.com/docs

www.sequoiadb.com/en/index.php?m=Files&a=index

Developer

Softmotions

Google

Robert Friberg et al

Sequoiadb Ltd.

Initial release

2012

2014

2009

under the name LiveDB

2013

Current release

3.4, August 2019

2.1.12, February 2017

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

GPLv2

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

Server: AGPL; Client: Apache V2

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

JavaScript

C++

Server operating systems

server-less

FreeBSD
Linux
Windows

experimental

server-less, requires a JavaScript environment (browser, Node.js)

tested with Chrome, Firefox, IE, Safari

Linux
Windows

Linux

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

schema-free

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

oid, date, timestamp, binary, regex

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

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language

via JavaScript builder pattern

SQL-like query language

APIs and other access methods

in-process shared library

gRPC
JSON over HTTP

.NET Client API
HTTP API
LINQ

proprietary protocol using JSON

Supported programming languages

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

.Net
C
C++
Clojure
Erlang
Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Perl
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Rust
Scala
Tcl

JavaScript

.Net

.Net
C++
Java
PHP
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

JavaScript

Triggers

yes, watching key changes

Using read-only observers

yes

Domain Events

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

horizontal partitioning

client side managed; servers are not synchronized

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

Using Raft consensus algorithm to ensure data replication with strong consistency among multiple replicas.

none

Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Eventual 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

Document is locked during a transaction

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Read/Write Locking

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

yes, by using IndexedDB or the cloud service Firebase Realtime Database

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

using MemoryDB

yes

User concepts

Access control

Role based authorization

simple password-based access control

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

Monitor Amazon EKS Control Plane metrics using AWS Open Source monitoring services | Amazon Web Services
12 October 2023, AWS Blog

Apache APISIX Without etcd?
27 July 2023, hackernoon.com

Killing a market, softly: How an RBI communique could end India's thriving ETCD market
7 April 2024, The Economic Times

ETCD directives don't go well with RBI's stellar reputation
14 April 2024, Business Standard

RBI holds firm on rupee derivatives stance, defers norm implementation to May 3
4 April 2024, The Hindu

provided by Google News

Share this page