DBMS > FatDB vs. HEAVY.AI vs. mSQL vs. OpenQM vs. OrigoDB

System Properties Comparison FatDB vs. HEAVY.AI vs. mSQL vs. OpenQM vs. OrigoDB

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.

A high performance, column-oriented RDBMS, specifically developed to harness the massive parallelism of modern CPU and GPU hardware

mSQL (Mini SQL) is a simple and lightweight RDBMS

QpenQM is a high-performance, self-tuning, multi-value DBMS

A fully ACID in-memory object graph database

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Multivalue DBMS

Document store
Object oriented DBMS

Secondary database models

Spatial DBMS

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

Score	1.77
Rank	#141	Overall
	#65	Relational DBMS

Score	1.27
Rank	#167	Overall
	#77	Relational DBMS

Score	0.27
Rank	#298	Overall
	#10	Multivalue DBMS

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

Website

github.com/heavyai/heavydb
www.heavy.ai

hughestech.com.au/products/msql

www.rocketsoftware.com/products/rocket-multivalue-application-development-platform/rocket-open-qm

origodb.com

Technical documentation

docs.heavy.ai

origodb.com/docs

Developer

FatCloud

HEAVY.AI, Inc.

Hughes Technologies

Rocket Software, originally Martin Phillips

Robert Friberg et al

Initial release

2012

2016

1994

1993

2009

under the name LiveDB

Current release

5.10, January 2022

4.4, October 2021

3.4-12

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache Version 2; enterprise edition available

commercial

free licenses can be provided

Open Source

GPLv2, extended commercial license available

Open Source

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++ and CUDA

Server operating systems

Windows

Linux

AIX
HP-UX
Linux
OS X
Solaris SPARC/x86
Windows

AIX
FreeBSD
Linux
macOS
Raspberry Pi
Solaris
Windows

Linux
Windows

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

with some exceptions

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.

yes

can be achieved using .NET

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

Via inetgration in SQL Server

yes

A subset of ANSI SQL is implemented

no subqueries, aggregate functions, views, foreign keys, triggers

APIs and other access methods

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

JDBC
ODBC
Thrift
Vega

JDBC
ODBC

.NET Client API
HTTP API
LINQ

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC/Thrift
Python

C
C++
Delphi
Java
Perl
PHP
Tcl

.Net
Basic
C
Java
Objective C
PHP
Python

.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

Round robin

none

yes

horizontal partitioning

client side managed; servers are not synchronized

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

selectable replication factor

Multi-source replication

none

yes

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

none

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

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

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

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Access rights can be defined down to the item level

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

Big Data Analytics: A Game Changer for Infrastructure
13 July 2023, Spiceworks News and Insights

HEAVY.AI Launches HEAVY 7.0, Introducing Real-Time Machine Learning Capabilities
19 April 2023, businesswire.com

Making the most of geospatial intelligence
14 April 2023, InfoWorld

HEAVY.AI Partners with Bain, Maxar, and Nvidia to Provide Digital Twins for Telecom Networks
16 February 2023, Datanami

The insideBIGDATA IMPACT 50 List for Q4 2023
11 October 2023, insideBIGDATA

provided by Google News

Make Your MySQL Server More Secure With These 7 Steps - MUO
1 December 2022, MakeUseOf

Writing a Web Service in Perl
9 July 2003, PCQuest

provided by Google News

Share this page