DBMS > EJDB vs. Microsoft SQL Server vs. OrigoDB vs. Stardog

System Properties Comparison EJDB vs. Microsoft SQL Server vs. OrigoDB vs. Stardog

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)

Microsofts flagship relational DBMS

A fully ACID in-memory object graph database

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

Primary database model

Document store

Relational DBMS

Document store
Object oriented DBMS

Graph DBMS
RDF store

Secondary database models

Document store
Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	0.27
Rank	#297	Overall
	#44	Document stores

Score	824.29
Rank	#3	Overall
	#3	Relational DBMS

Score	0.00
Rank	#383	Overall
	#53	Document stores
	#20	Object oriented DBMS

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

Website

github.com/Softmotions/ejdb

www.microsoft.com/en-us/sql-server

origodb.com

www.stardog.com

Technical documentation

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

learn.microsoft.com/en-US/sql/sql-server

origodb.com/docs

docs.stardog.com

Developer

Softmotions

Microsoft

Robert Friberg et al

Stardog-Union

Initial release

2012

1989

2009

under the name LiveDB

2010

Current release

SQL Server 2022, November 2022

7.3.0, May 2020

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

GPLv2

commercial

restricted free version is available

Open Source

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

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

Linux
Windows

Linux
macOS
Windows

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

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

User defined using .NET types and collections

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

can be achieved using .NET

Import/export of XML data possible

Secondary indexes

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
OLE DB
Tabular Data Stream (TDS)

.NET Client API
HTTP API
LINQ

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

C#
C++
Delphi
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Visual Basic

.Net

.Net
Clojure
Groovy
Java
JavaScript
Python
Ruby

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Transact SQL, .NET languages, R, Python and (with SQL Server 2019) Java

yes

user defined functions and aggregates, HTTP Server extensions in Java

Triggers

yes

Domain Events

yes

via event handlers

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

tables can be distributed across several files (horizontal partitioning); sharding through federation

horizontal partitioning

client side managed; servers are not synchronized

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

yes, but depending on the SQL-Server Edition

Source-replica replication

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

Immediate Consistency in HA-Cluster

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

typically not needed, however similar functionality with collection joins possible

yes

depending on model

yes

relationships in graphs

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Read/Write Locking

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

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

User concepts

Access control

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Role based authorization

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.