DBMS > EJDB vs. etcd vs. RavenDB vs. Transbase

System Properties Comparison EJDB vs. etcd vs. RavenDB vs. Transbase

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)

A distributed reliable key-value store

Open Source Operational and Transactional Enterprise NoSQL Document Database

A resource-optimized, high-performance, universally applicable RDBMS

Primary database model

Secondary database models

Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS
Time Series DBMS

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

Score	0.27
Rank	#297	Overall
	#44	Document stores

Score	7.25
Rank	#54	Overall
	#5	Key-value stores

Score	2.92
Rank	#101	Overall
	#18	Document stores

Score	0.11
Rank	#341	Overall
	#150	Relational DBMS

Website

github.com/Softmotions/ejdb

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

ravendb.net

www.transaction.de/en/products/transbase.html

Technical documentation

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

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

ravendb.net/docs

www.transaction.de/en/products/transbase/features.html

Developer

Softmotions

Hibernating Rhinos

Transaction Software GmbH

Initial release

2012

2010

1987

Current release

3.4, August 2019

5.4, July 2022

Transbase 8.3, 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

GPLv2

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

Open Source

AGPL version 3, commercial license available

commercial

free development license

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 and C++

Server operating systems

server-less

FreeBSD
Linux
Windows

experimental

Linux
macOS
Raspberry Pi
Windows

FreeBSD
Linux
macOS
Solaris
Windows

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

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.

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language (RQL)

yes

APIs and other access methods

in-process shared library

gRPC
JSON over HTTP

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

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
Proprietary native API

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

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

C
C#
C++
Java
JavaScript
Kotlin
Objective-C
PHP
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Triggers

yes, watching key changes

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

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.

Multi-source replication

Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

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.

Immediate Consistency

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, Cluster-wide transaction available

yes

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

Authorization levels configured per client per database

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

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

CoreOS updates its Tectonic container platform with the latest Kubernetes release, etcd as a service
28 April 2024, Yahoo Movies UK

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

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

Public preview: AKS cluster control plane metrics in managed Prometheus | Azure updates
12 February 2024, azure.microsoft.com

How can corporates use the ETCD platform to hedge their forex? Gaurang Somaiya explains
4 August 2023, The Economic Times

provided by Google News

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

RavenDB Welcomes David Baruc as Chief Revenue Officer: Seasoned Tech Leader to Drive Global Sales and ...
13 June 2023, PR Newswire

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

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

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

provided by Google News

Share this page