DBMS > EsgynDB vs. Graph Engine vs. Memcached vs. OrigoDB vs. TerarkDB

System Properties Comparison EsgynDB vs. Graph Engine vs. Memcached vs. OrigoDB vs. TerarkDB

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

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

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

In-memory key-value store, originally intended for caching

A fully ACID in-memory object graph database

A key-value store forked from RocksDB with advanced compression algorithms. It can be used standalone or as a storage engine for MySQL and MongoDB

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Graph DBMS
Key-value store

Key-value store

Document store
Object oriented DBMS

Key-value store

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

Score	0.16
Rank	#329	Overall
	#146	Relational DBMS

Score	0.61
Rank	#240	Overall
	#21	Graph DBMS
	#35	Key-value stores

Score	19.42
Rank	#32	Overall
	#4	Key-value stores

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

Score	0.00
Rank	#383	Overall
	#60	Key-value stores

Website

github.com/bytedance/terarkdb

Technical documentation

www.graphengine.io/docs/manual

github.com/memcached/memcached/wiki

origodb.com/docs

bytedance.larkoffice.com/docs/doccnZmYFqHBm06BbvYgjsHHcKc

Developer

Esgyn

Microsoft

Danga Interactive

originally developed by Brad Fitzpatrick for LiveJournal

Robert Friberg et al

ByteDance, originally Terark

Initial release

2015

2010

2003

2009

under the name LiveDB

2016

Current release

1.6.25, March 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

MIT License

Open Source

BSD license

Open Source

commercial

restricted open source version 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

.NET and C

C++

Server operating systems

Linux

.NET

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X
Unix
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

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.

can be achieved using .NET

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

APIs and other access methods

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

RESTful HTTP API

Proprietary protocol

.NET Client API
HTTP API
LINQ

C++ API
Java API

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC/ADO.Net

C#
C++
F#
Visual Basic

.Net
C
C++
ColdFusion
Erlang
Java
Lisp
Lua
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby

.Net

C++
Java

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Java Stored Procedures

yes

Triggers

yes

Domain Events

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

horizontal partitioning

none

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

none

Repcached, a Memcached patch, provides this functionallity

Source-replica replication

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

depending on model

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

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

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

User concepts

Access control

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

yes

using SASL (Simple Authentication and Security Layer) protocol

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

DB-Engines blog posts

Redis extends the lead in the DB-Engines key-value store ranking
3 February 2014, Matthias Gelbmann

New DB-Engines Ranking shows the popularity of database management systems
3 October 2012, Matthias Gelbmann, Paul Andlinger

show all

Recent citations in the news

Trinity
2 June 2023, Microsoft

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

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

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

How Google and Microsoft taught search to "understand" the Web
6 June 2012, Ars Technica

provided by Google News

Why DDoS Threat Actors Are Shifting Their Tactics
15 March 2024, Infosecurity Magazine

Ubuntu 24.04 Helping Achieve Greater Performance On Intel Xeon Scalable Emerald Rapids
8 March 2024, Phoronix

What are memcached servers, and why are they being used to launch record-setting DDoS attacks?
6 March 2018, GeekWire

Introducing mcrouter: A memcached protocol router for scaling memcached deployments
15 September 2014, Facebook Engineering

Why Redis beats Memcached for caching
14 September 2017, InfoWorld

provided by Google News

Share this page