DBMS > GBase vs. MaxDB vs. OrigoDB vs. Riak KV

System Properties Comparison GBase vs. MaxDB vs. OrigoDB vs. Riak KV

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Widely used RDBMS in China, including analytical, transactional, distributed transactional, and cloud-native data warehousing.

A robust and reliable RDBMS optimized to run all major SAP solutions

A fully ACID in-memory object graph database

Distributed, fault tolerant key-value store

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Document store
Object oriented DBMS

Key-value store

with links between data sets and object tags for the creation of secondary indexes

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

Score	1.07
Rank	#185	Overall
	#86	Relational DBMS

Score	2.32
Rank	#112	Overall
	#55	Relational DBMS

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

Score	4.10
Rank	#82	Overall
	#9	Key-value stores

Website

www.gbase.cn

maxdb.sap.com

origodb.com

Technical documentation

maxdb.sap.com/documentation

origodb.com/docs

www.tiot.jp/riak-docs/riak/kv/latest

Developer

General Data Technology Co., Ltd.

SAP, acquired from Software AG (Adabas-D) in 1997

Robert Friberg et al

OpenSource, formerly Basho Technologies

Initial release

2004

1984

2009

under the name LiveDB

2009

Current release

GBase 8a, GBase 8s, GBase 8c

7.9.10.12, February 2024

3.2.0, December 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Limited community edition free

Open Source

Apache version 2, commercial enterprise edition

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, Python

C++

Erlang

Server operating systems

Linux

AIX
HP-UX
Linux
Solaris
Windows

Linux
Windows

Linux
OS X

Data scheme

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.

yes

can be achieved using .NET

Secondary indexes

yes

restricted

SQL

Support of SQL

Standard with numerous extensions

yes

APIs and other access methods

ADO.NET
C API
JDBC
ODBC

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
WebDAV

.NET Client API
HTTP API
LINQ

HTTP API
Native Erlang Interface

Supported programming languages

.Net
C#
Java
Perl
PHP
Python

.Net

unofficial client library
C#
C++

unofficial client library
Clojure

unofficial client library
Dart

unofficial client library
Erlang
Go

unofficial client library
Groovy

unofficial client library
Haskell

unofficial client library
Java
JavaScript

unofficial client library
Lisp

unofficial client library
Perl

unofficial client library
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scala

unofficial client library
Smalltalk

unofficial client library

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

yes

Erlang

Triggers

yes

Domain Events

yes

pre-commit hooks and post-commit hooks

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

horizontal partitioning (by range, list and hash) and vertical partitioning

none

horizontal partitioning

client side managed; servers are not synchronized

Sharding

no "single point of failure"

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Source-replica replication

selectable replication factor

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

depending on model

links between data sets can be stored

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

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

yes

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Role based authorization

yes, using Riak Security

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

SAP Content Server High Availability using Amazon EFS and SUSE | Amazon Web Services
30 December 2020, AWS Blog

SAP Aligns Mainstream Maintenance Commitments Across Its Enterprise Solutions
11 August 2020, SAP News

SIOS looks to boost SAP HANA automated replication
29 March 2023, TechTarget

Remotely Exploitable Vulnerabilities in SAP Compression Algorithms
13 May 2015, Threatpost

Your SAP HANA Cheat Sheet: Milestones, Terms and More
14 May 2012, SiliconANGLE News

provided by Google News

Basho Revamps Riak Open-Source Database
22 September 2023, InformationWeek

Basho, Maker of Riak NoSQL Database, Raises $25M
13 January 2015, Data Center Knowledge

A Critique of Resizable Hash Tables: Riak Core & Random Slicing
26 August 2018, InfoQ.com

Riak NoSQL snapped up by Bet365
12 September 2017, ComputerWeekly.com

NoSQL pioneer Basho stamps its mark on time stamp data with Riak TS
6 October 2015, The Register

provided by Google News

Share this page