DBMS > Ehcache vs. Microsoft SQL Server vs. OrigoDB vs. RavenDB vs. Realm

System Properties Comparison Ehcache vs. Microsoft SQL Server vs. OrigoDB vs. RavenDB vs. Realm

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

A widely adopted Java cache with tiered storage options

Microsofts flagship relational DBMS

A fully ACID in-memory object graph database

Open Source Operational and Transactional Enterprise NoSQL Document Database

A DBMS built for use on mobile devices that’s a fast, easy to use alternative to SQLite and Core Data

Primary database model

Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Document store
Object oriented DBMS

Document store

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	4.89
Rank	#67	Overall
	#8	Key-value stores

Score	824.29
Rank	#3	Overall
	#3	Relational DBMS

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

Score	2.92
Rank	#101	Overall
	#18	Document stores

Score	7.60
Rank	#52	Overall
	#9	Document stores

Website

www.ehcache.org

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

origodb.com

ravendb.net

realm.io

Technical documentation

www.ehcache.org/documentation

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

origodb.com/docs

ravendb.net/docs

realm.io/docs

Developer

Terracotta Inc, owned by Software AG

Microsoft

Robert Friberg et al

Hibernating Rhinos

Realm, acquired by MongoDB in May 2019

Initial release

2009

1989

2009

under the name LiveDB

2010

2014

Current release

3.10.0, March 2022

SQL Server 2022, November 2022

5.4, July 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache Version 2; commercial licenses available

commercial

restricted free version is available

Open Source

AGPL version 3, commercial license available

Open Source

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

Java

C++

Server operating systems

All OS with a Java VM

Linux
Windows

Linux
macOS
Raspberry Pi
Windows

Android
Backend: server-less
iOS
Windows

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

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

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

SQL-like query language (RQL)

APIs and other access methods

JCache

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
OLE DB
Tabular Data Stream (TDS)

.NET Client API
HTTP API
LINQ

.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

Java

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

.Net

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

.Net
Java

with Android only
Objective-C
React Native
Swift

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

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

yes

runs within the applications so server-side scripts are unnecessary

Triggers

yes

Cache Event Listeners

yes

Domain Events

yes

Change Listeners

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

by using Terracotta Server

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

horizontal partitioning

client side managed; servers are not synchronized

Sharding

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

by using Terracotta Server

yes, but depending on the SQL-Server Edition

Source-replica replication

Multi-source replication

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Tunable Consistency (Strong, Eventual, Weak)

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

yes

depending on model

Transaction concepts

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

yes

supports JTA and can work as an XA resource

ACID

ACID, Cluster-wide transaction available

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

using a tiered cache-storage approach

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

In-Memory realm

User concepts

Access control

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Role based authorization

Authorization levels configured per client per database

yes

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.