DBMS > FatDB vs. OpenTSDB vs. RavenDB vs. Transbase

System Properties Comparison FatDB vs. OpenTSDB vs. RavenDB vs. Transbase

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.

Scalable Time Series DBMS based on HBase

Open Source Operational and Transactional Enterprise NoSQL Document Database

A resource-optimized, high-performance, universally applicable RDBMS

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Time Series DBMS

Document store

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS
Time Series DBMS

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

Score	1.73
Rank	#147	Overall
	#12	Time Series DBMS

Score	3.01
Rank	#101	Overall
	#17	Document stores

Score	0.15
Rank	#337	Overall
	#147	Relational DBMS

Website

opentsdb.net

ravendb.net

www.transaction.de/en/products/transbase.html

Technical documentation

opentsdb.net/docs/build/html/index.html

ravendb.net/docs

www.transaction.de/en/products/transbase/features.html

Developer

FatCloud

currently maintained by Yahoo and other contributors

Hibernating Rhinos

Transaction Software GmbH

Initial release

2012

2011

2010

1987

Current release

5.4, July 2022

Transbase 8.3, 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

LGPL

Open Source

AGPL version 3, commercial license available

commercial

free development license

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

Java

C and C++

Server operating systems

Windows

Linux
Windows

Linux
macOS
Raspberry Pi
Windows

FreeBSD
Linux
macOS
Solaris
Windows

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

numeric data for metrics, strings for tags

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

Via inetgration in SQL Server

SQL-like query language (RQL)

yes

APIs and other access methods

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

HTTP API
Telnet 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

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
Proprietary native API

Supported programming languages

Erlang
Go
Java
Python
R
Ruby

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

C
C#
C++
Java
JavaScript
Kotlin
Objective-C
PHP
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

via applications

yes

Triggers

yes

via applications

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

based on HBase

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

selectable replication factor

based on HBase

Multi-source replication

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

based on HBase

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.

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID, Cluster-wide transaction available

yes

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

In-memory capabilities

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

User concepts

Access control

Can implement custom security layer via applications

Authorization levels configured per client per database

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

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

Time Series DBMS are the database category with the fastest increase in popularity
4 July 2016, Matthias Gelbmann

show all

Recent citations in the news

Comparing Different Time-Series Databases
10 February 2022, hackernoon.com

Brain Monitoring with Kafka, OpenTSDB, and Grafana
5 August 2016, KDnuggets

MapR to help admins peer into dense Hadoop clusters
28 June 2016, SiliconANGLE News

Comparing InfluxDB, TimescaleDB, and QuestDB Timeseries Databases
30 June 2021, Towards Data Science

provided by Google News

RavenDB Welcomes David Baruc as Chief Revenue Officer: Seasoned Tech Leader to Drive Global Sales and ...
13 June 2023, PR Newswire

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

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

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

RavenDB Adds Graph Queries
15 May 2019, Datanami

provided by Google News

Share this page