DBMS > EsgynDB vs. GeoMesa vs. Graph Engine vs. RavenDB

System Properties Comparison EsgynDB vs. GeoMesa vs. Graph Engine vs. RavenDB

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

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

GeoMesa is a distributed spatio-temporal DBMS based on various systems as storage layer.

A distributed in-memory data processing engine, underpinned by a strongly-typed RAM store and a general distributed computation engine

Open Source Operational and Transactional Enterprise NoSQL Document Database

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Spatial DBMS

Graph DBMS
Key-value store

Document store

Secondary database models

Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS
Time Series DBMS

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

Score	0.25
Rank	#312	Overall
	#138	Relational DBMS

Score	0.86
Rank	#205	Overall
	#4	Spatial DBMS

Score	0.67
Rank	#232	Overall
	#21	Graph DBMS
	#34	Key-value stores

Score	2.84
Rank	#101	Overall
	#18	Document stores

Website

Technical documentation

www.geomesa.org/documentation/stable/user/index.html

www.graphengine.io/docs/manual

ravendb.net/docs

Developer

Esgyn

CCRi and others

Microsoft

Hibernating Rhinos

Initial release

2015

2014

2010

Current release

5.0.0, May 2024

5.4, July 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache License 2.0

Open Source

MIT License

Open Source

AGPL version 3, 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.

Implementation language

C++, Java

Scala

.NET and C

Server operating systems

Linux

.NET

Linux
macOS
Raspberry Pi
Windows

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

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

yes

SQL-like query language (RQL)

APIs and other access methods

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

RESTful HTTP API

.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

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC/ADO.Net

C#
C++
F#
Visual Basic

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

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Java Stored Procedures

yes

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

depending on storage layer

horizontal partitioning

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication between multi datacenters

depending on storage layer

Multi-source replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

depending on storage layer

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.

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

ACID, Cluster-wide transaction available

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

optional: either by committing a write-ahead log (WAL) to the local persistent storage or by dumping the memory to a persistent storage

yes

In-memory capabilities

Is there an option to define some or all structures to be held in-memory only.

depending on storage layer

yes

User concepts

Access control

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

yes

depending on the DBMS used for storage

Authorization levels configured per client per database

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

DB-Engines blog posts

Spatial database management systems
6 April 2021, Matthias Gelbmann

show all

Recent citations in the news

Trinity
30 October 2010, Microsoft

Open source Microsoft Graph Engine takes on Neo4j
13 February 2017, InfoWorld

Aerospike Is Now a Graph Database, Too
21 June 2023, Datanami

The graph analytics landscape 2019 - DataScienceCentral.com
27 February 2019, Data Science Central

IBM releases Graph, a service that can outperform SQL databases
27 July 2016, GeekWire

provided by Google News

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

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

RavenDB Adds Graph Queries
15 May 2019, Datanami

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

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

provided by Google News

Share this page