DBMS > EsgynDB vs. FatDB vs. GridGain vs. OrigoDB vs. TinkerGraph

System Properties Comparison EsgynDB vs. FatDB vs. GridGain vs. OrigoDB vs. TinkerGraph

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

FatDB/FatCloud has ceased operations as a company with February 2014. FatDB is discontinued and excluded from the ranking.

Description

Enterprise-class SQL-on-Hadoop solution, powered by Apache Trafodion

A .NET NoSQL DBMS that can integrate with and extend SQL Server.

GridGain is an in-memory computing platform, built on Apache Ignite

A fully ACID in-memory object graph database

A lightweight, in-memory graph engine that serves as a reference implementation of the TinkerPop3 API

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Document store
Key-value store

Key-value store
Relational DBMS

Document store
Object oriented DBMS

Graph DBMS

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

Score	0.16
Rank	#329	Overall
	#146	Relational DBMS

Score	1.47
Rank	#154	Overall
	#26	Key-value stores
	#72	Relational DBMS

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

Score	0.08
Rank	#348	Overall
	#35	Graph DBMS

Website

www.esgyn.cn

www.gridgain.com

origodb.com

tinkerpop.apache.org/docs/current/reference/#tinkergraph-gremlin

Technical documentation

www.gridgain.com/docs/index.html

origodb.com/docs

Developer

Esgyn

FatCloud

GridGain Systems, Inc.

Robert Friberg et al

Initial release

2015

2012

2007

2009

under the name LiveDB

2009

Current release

GridGain 8.5.1

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache 2.0

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

Java, C++, .Net

Java

Server operating systems

Linux

Windows

Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

Linux
Windows

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

yes

schema-free

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

Via inetgration in SQL Server

ANSI-99 for query and DML statements, subset of DDL

APIs and other access methods

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

.NET Client API
LINQ
RESTful HTTP API
RPC
Windows WCF Bindings

HDFS API
Hibernate
JCache
JDBC
ODBC
Proprietary protocol
RESTful HTTP API
Spring Data

.NET Client API
HTTP API
LINQ

TinkerPop 3

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC/ADO.Net

C#
C++
Java
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scala

.Net

Groovy
Java

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Java Stored Procedures

yes

via applications

yes (compute grid and cache interceptors can be used instead)

yes

Triggers

yes

via applications

yes (cache interceptors and events)

yes

Domain Events

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

horizontal partitioning

client side managed; servers are not synchronized

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication between multi datacenters

selectable replication factor

yes (replicated cache)

Source-replica replication

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

yes (compute grid and hadoop accelerator)

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Immediate Consistency

none

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

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

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

Write ahead log

optional

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

Can implement custom security layer via applications

Security Hooks for custom implementations

Role based authorization

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

GridGain's 2023 Growth Positions Company for Strong 2024
25 January 2024, Datanami

GridGain in-memory data and generative AI – Blocks and Files
10 May 2024, Blocks & Files

GridGain to Sponsor and Speak at Three Key Industry Events in May 2024
2 May 2024, PR Newswire

GridGain Adds Andy Sacks as Chief Revenue Officer, Promotes Lalit Ahuja to Chief Customer and Product Officer ...
17 July 2023, Yahoo Finance

GridGain: Product Overview and Analysis
5 June 2019, eWeek

provided by Google News

Automated testing of Amazon Neptune data access with Apache TinkerPop Gremlin | Amazon Web Services
28 September 2022, AWS Blog

Simple Deployment of a Graph Database: JanusGraph | by Edward Elson Kosasih
12 October 2020, Towards Data Science

Why developers like Apache TinkerPop, an open source framework for graph computing | Amazon Web Services
27 September 2021, AWS Blog

InfiniteGraph Gets Support for Common Graph Database Language and More
21 February 2012, SiliconANGLE News

Introducing Gremlin query hints for Amazon Neptune | AWS Database Blog
26 February 2019, AWS Blog

provided by Google News

Share this page