DBMS > EJDB vs. Microsoft Azure SQL Database vs. Newts vs. RavenDB

System Properties Comparison EJDB vs. Microsoft Azure SQL Database vs. Newts vs. RavenDB

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)

Database as a Service offering with high compatibility to Microsoft SQL Server

Time Series DBMS based on Cassandra

Open Source Operational and Transactional Enterprise NoSQL Document Database

Primary database model

Secondary database models

Document store
Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS

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	76.78
Rank	#16	Overall
	#11	Relational DBMS

Score	0.07
Rank	#375	Overall
	#41	Time Series DBMS

Score	2.84
Rank	#101	Overall
	#18	Document stores

Website

github.com/Softmotions/ejdb

azure.microsoft.com/en-us/products/azure-sql/database

opennms.github.io/newts

ravendb.net

Technical documentation

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

docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/azure-sql

github.com/OpenNMS/newts/wiki

ravendb.net/docs

Developer

Softmotions

Microsoft

OpenNMS Group

Hibernating Rhinos

Initial release

2012

2010

2014

2010

Current release

V12

5.4, July 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

GPLv2

commercial

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

AGPL version 3, commercial license available

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++

Java

Server operating systems

server-less

hosted

Linux
OS X
Windows

Linux
macOS
Raspberry Pi
Windows

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

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

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

SQL-like query language (RQL)

APIs and other access methods

in-process shared library

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

HTTP REST
Java API

.NET Client API
F# Client API
Go Client API
Java Client API
NodeJS Client API
PHP Client API
Python Client API
RESTful HTTP API

Supported programming languages

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

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

Java

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

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Transact SQL

yes

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

based on Cassandra

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

yes, with always 3 replicas available

selectable replication factor

based on Cassandra

Multi-source replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency

based on Cassandra
Immediate Consistency

based on Cassandra

Default ACID transactions on the local node (eventually consistent across the cluster). Atomic operations with cluster-wide ACID transactions. Eventual consistency for indexes and full-text search indexes.

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

ACID

ACID, Cluster-wide transaction available

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.

User concepts

Access control

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Authorization levels configured per client per database

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

PostgreSQL is the DBMS of the Year 2020
4 January 2021, Paul Andlinger, Matthias Gelbmann

Cloud-based DBMS's popularity grows at high rates
12 December 2019, Paul Andlinger

The popularity of cloud-based DBMSs has increased tenfold in four years
7 February 2017, Matthias Gelbmann

show all

Recent citations in the news

Copilot in Azure SQL Database in Private Preview
27 March 2024, InfoQ.com

Microsoft unveils Copilot for Azure SQL Database
27 March 2024, InfoWorld

Azure SQL Database migration to OCI - resources estimation and migration approach
11 January 2024, Oracle

Expand the limits of innovation with Azure data
21 March 2024, Microsoft

Why migrate Windows Server and SQL Server to Azure: ROI, innovation, and free offers
25 April 2024, Microsoft

provided by Google News

RavenDB Launches Version 6.0 Lightning Fast Queries, Data Integrations, Corax Indexing Engine, and Sharding
3 October 2023, PR Newswire

Install the NoSQL RavenDB Data System
14 May 2021, The New Stack

RavenDB Adds Graph Queries
15 May 2019, Datanami

How I Created a RavenDB Python Client
23 September 2016, Visual Studio Magazine

Oren Eini on RavenDB, Including Consistency Guarantees and C# as the Implementation Language
23 May 2022, InfoQ.com

provided by Google News

Share this page