DBMS > EsgynDB vs. H2GIS vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. RavenDB vs. TinkerGraph

System Properties Comparison EsgynDB vs. H2GIS vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. RavenDB vs. TinkerGraph

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

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

Spatial extension of H2

A Wide Column Store for rapid development using massive semi-structured datasets

Open Source Operational and Transactional Enterprise NoSQL Document Database

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

Primary database model

Secondary database models

Relational DBMS

Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS
Time Series DBMS

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

Score	0.16
Rank	#329	Overall
	#146	Relational DBMS

Score	0.00
Rank	#383	Overall
	#7	Spatial DBMS

Score	4.48
Rank	#75	Overall
	#6	Wide column stores

Score	2.92
Rank	#101	Overall
	#18	Document stores

Score	0.08
Rank	#348	Overall
	#35	Graph DBMS

Website

www.esgyn.cn

www.h2gis.org

azure.microsoft.com/en-us/services/storage/tables

ravendb.net

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

Technical documentation

www.h2gis.org/docs/home

ravendb.net/docs

Developer

Esgyn

CNRS

Microsoft

Hibernating Rhinos

Initial release

2015

2013

2012

2010

2009

Current release

5.4, July 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

LGPL 3.0

commercial

Open Source

AGPL version 3, commercial license available

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Cloud-based only

Only available as a cloud service

yes

DBaaS offerings (sponsored links)

Database as a Service

Providers of DBaaS offerings, please contact us to be listed.

Implementation language

C++, Java

Java

Server operating systems

Linux

hosted

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

TinkerPop 3

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC/ADO.Net

Java

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

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

Groovy
Java

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Java Stored Procedures

yes

based on H2

yes

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

none

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

Sharding

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication between multi datacenters

yes

based on H2

yes

implicit feature of the cloud service. Replication either local, cross-facility or geo-redundant.

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

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.

none

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Relationships in graphs

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

optimistic locking

ACID, Cluster-wide transaction available

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

yes, multi-version concurrency control (MVCC)

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

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

yes

based on H2

Access rights based on private key authentication or shared access signatures

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

Recent citations in the news

Working with Azure to Use and Manage Data Lakes
7 March 2024, Simplilearn

How to Use C# Azure.Data.Tables SDK with Azure Cosmos DB
9 July 2021, hackernoon.com

How to use Azure Table storage in .Net
14 January 2019, InfoWorld

Inside Azure File Storage
7 October 2015, Microsoft

How to write data to Azure Table Store with an Azure Function
14 April 2017, Experts Exchange

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

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

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

RavenDB Adds Graph Queries
15 May 2019, Datanami

provided by Google News

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

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

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

provided by Google News

Share this page