DBMS > EJDB vs. Postgres-XL vs. ScyllaDB

System Properties Comparison EJDB vs. Postgres-XL vs. ScyllaDB

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)

Based on PostgreSQL enhanced with MPP and write-scale-out cluster features

Cassandra and DynamoDB compatible wide column store

Primary database model

Document store

Relational DBMS

Wide column store

Secondary database models

Document store
Spatial DBMS

Key-value store

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

Score	0.27
Rank	#297	Overall
	#44	Document stores

Score	0.49
Rank	#256	Overall
	#117	Relational DBMS

Score	4.75
Rank	#68	Overall
	#5	Wide column stores

Website

github.com/Softmotions/ejdb

www.postgres-xl.org

www.scylladb.com

Technical documentation

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

www.postgres-xl.org/documentation

docs.scylladb.com

Developer

Softmotions

ScyllaDB

Initial release

2012

2014

since 2012, originally named StormDB

2015

Current release

10 R1, October 2018

ScyllaDB Open Source 5.4.1, January 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

GPLv2

Open Source

Mozilla public license

Open Source

Open Source (AGPL), commercial license available

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.

Scylla Cloud: Create real-time applications that run at global scale with Scylla Cloud, the industry’s most powerful NoSQL DBaaS

Implementation language

C++

Server operating systems

server-less

Linux
macOS

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

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

XML type, but no XML query functionality

Secondary indexes

yes

cluster global secondary indices

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

distributed, parallel query execution

SQL-like DML and DDL statements (CQL)

APIs and other access methods

in-process shared library

ADO.NET
JDBC
native C library
ODBC
streaming API for large objects

Proprietary protocol (CQL)

compatible with CQL (Cassandra Query Language, an SQL-like language)
RESTful HTTP API (DynamoDB compatible)
Thrift

Supported programming languages

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

.Net
C
C++
Delphi
Erlang
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Perl
PHP
Python
Tcl

For CQL interface: C#, C++, Clojure, Erlang, Go, Haskell, Java, JavaScript, Node.js, Perl, PHP, Python, Ruby, Rust, Scala
For DynamoDB interface: .Net, ColdFusion, Erlang, Groovy, Java, JavaScript, Perl, PHP, Python, Ruby

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

yes, Lua

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

horizontal partitioning

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

selectable replication factor

Representation of geographical distribution of servers is possible

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency
Tunable Consistency

can be individually decided for each write operation

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

MVCC

Atomicity and isolation are supported for single operations

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

in-memory tables

User concepts

Access control

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Access rights for users can be defined per object

More information provided by the system vendor

Specific characteristics

ScyllaDB is engineered to deliver predictable performance at scale. It’s adopted...
» more

Competitive advantages

Highly-performant (efficiently utilizes full resources of a node and network; millions...
» more

Typical application scenarios

ScyllaDB is ideal for applications that require high throughput and low latency at...
» more

Key customers

Discord, Epic Games, Expedia, Zillow, Comcast, Disney+ Hotstar, Samsung, ShareChat,...
» more

Market metrics

ScyllaDB typically offers ~75% total cost of ownership savings, with ~5X higher throughput...
» more

Licensing and pricing models

ScyllaDB Open Source - free open source software (AGPL) ScyllaDB Enterprise - subscription-based...
» more

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

Sleeping at Scale - Delivering 10k Timers per Second per Node with Rust, Tokio, Kafka, and Scylla
26 April 2024, InfoQ.com

ScyllaDB Raises $43M to Take on MongoDB at Scale, Push Database Performance to New Levels
17 October 2023, Datanami

Discord Migrates Trillions of Messages from Cassandra to ScyllaDB
22 June 2023, InfoQ.com

ScyllaDB on AWS is a NoSQL Database Built for Gigabyte-to-Petabyte Scale | Amazon Web Services
6 January 2023, AWS Blog

Scylla vs Cassandra: Performance Comparison - DataScienceCentral.com
9 January 2020, Data Science Central

provided by Google News

Share this page