DBMS > FatDB vs. Google Cloud Bigtable vs. Graph Engine vs. OrigoDB

System Properties Comparison FatDB vs. Google Cloud Bigtable vs. Graph Engine vs. OrigoDB

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

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

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

Google's NoSQL Big Data database service. It's the same database that powers many core Google services, including Search, Analytics, Maps, and Gmail.

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

A fully ACID in-memory object graph database

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Key-value store
Wide column store

Graph DBMS
Key-value store

Document store
Object oriented DBMS

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

Score	3.15
Rank	#95	Overall
	#14	Key-value stores
	#8	Wide column stores

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

Score	0.06
Rank	#380	Overall
	#50	Document stores
	#18	Object oriented DBMS

Website

cloud.google.com/bigtable

www.graphengine.io

origodb.com

Technical documentation

cloud.google.com/bigtable/docs

www.graphengine.io/docs/manual

origodb.com/docs

Developer

FatCloud

Google

Microsoft

Robert Friberg et al

Initial release

2012

2015

2010

2009

under the name LiveDB

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

MIT License

Open Source

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

.NET and C

Server operating systems

Windows

hosted

.NET

Linux
Windows

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

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

Via inetgration in SQL Server

APIs and other access methods

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

gRPC (using protocol buffers) API
HappyBase (Python library)
HBase compatible API (Java)

RESTful HTTP API

.NET Client API
HTTP API
LINQ

Supported programming languages

C#
C++
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

C#
C++
F#
Visual Basic

.Net

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

via applications

yes

Triggers

yes

via applications

yes

Domain Events

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

horizontal partitioning

client side managed; servers are not synchronized

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

selectable replication factor

Internal replication in Colossus, and regional replication between two clusters in different zones

Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Immediate consistency (for a single cluster), Eventual consistency (for two or more replicated clusters)

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

depending on model

Transaction concepts

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

Atomic single-row operations

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

In-memory capabilities

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

yes

User concepts

Access control

Can implement custom security layer via applications

Access rights for users, groups and roles based on Google Cloud Identity and Access Management (IAM)

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

Google Introduces Autoscaling for Cloud Bigtable for Optimizing Costs
31 January 2022, InfoQ.com

Google scales up Cloud Bigtable NoSQL database
27 January 2022, TechTarget

Review: Google Bigtable scales with ease
7 September 2016, InfoWorld

Google Cloud makes it cheaper to run smaller workloads on Bigtable
7 April 2020, TechCrunch

Google introduces Cloud Bigtable managed NoSQL database to process data at scale
6 May 2015, VentureBeat

provided by Google News

Trinity
30 October 2010, Microsoft

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

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

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

provided by Google News

Share this page