DBMS > Galaxybase vs. GridDB vs. RavenDB vs. TempoIQ

System Properties Comparison Galaxybase vs. GridDB vs. RavenDB vs. TempoIQ

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

TempoIQ seems to be decommissioned. It will be removed from the DB-Engines ranking.

Description

Scalable, ACID-compliant native distributed parallel graph platform

Scalable in-memory time series database optimized for IoT and Big Data

Open Source Operational and Transactional Enterprise NoSQL Document Database

Scalable analytics DBMS for sensor data, provided as a service (SaaS)

Primary database model

Secondary database models

Key-value store
Relational DBMS

Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS
Time Series DBMS

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

Score	0.00
Rank	#385	Overall
	#40	Graph DBMS

Score	1.91
Rank	#123	Overall
	#10	Time Series DBMS

Score	2.68
Rank	#102	Overall
	#19	Document stores

Website

galaxybase.com

griddb.net

ravendb.net

tempoiq.com (offline)

Technical documentation

docs.griddb.net

ravendb.net/docs

Developer

Chuanglin(Createlink) Technology Co., Ltd 浙江创邻科技有限公司

Toshiba Corporation

Hibernating Rhinos

TempoIQ

Initial release

2017

2013

2010

2012

Current release

Nov 20, November 2021

5.1, August 2022

5.4, July 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

AGPL version 3 and Apache License, version 2.0 , commercial license (standard and advanced editions) also available

Open Source

AGPL version 3, commercial license available

commercial

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 and Java

C++

Server operating systems

Linux

Linux
macOS
Raspberry Pi
Windows

Data scheme

Strong typed schema

yes

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

numerical, string, blob, geometry, boolean, timestamp

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

SQL92, SQL-like TQL (Toshiba Query Language)

SQL-like query language (RQL)

APIs and other access methods

Browser interface
console (shell)
Graph API (Gremlin)
OpenCypher
Proprietary native API

JDBC
ODBC
Proprietary protocol
RESTful HTTP/JSON 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

HTTP API

Supported programming languages

Go
Java
Python

C
C++
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby

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

C#
Java
JavaScript

Node.js
Python
Ruby

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined procedures and functions

yes

Triggers

yes

Realtime Alerts

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Source-replica replication

Multi-source replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Connector for using GridDB as an input source and output destination for Hadoop MapReduce jobs

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Immediate consistency within container, eventual consistency across containers

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.

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Relationships in graphs

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

ACID at container level

ACID, Cluster-wide transaction available

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.

yes

User concepts

Access control

Role-based access control

Access rights for users can be defined per database

Authorization levels configured per client per database

simple authentication-based access control

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

TOSHIBA DIGITAL SOLUTIONS CORPORATION
1 November 2020, global.toshiba

Toshiba launches cloudy managed IoT database service running its own GridDB
8 April 2021, The Register

Now Features Scale-Out and Scale-Up combo for Petabyte-scale Data Management
3 December 2019, global.toshiba

Amazon Proposes to Develop New Data Center Campus in Virginia
26 August 2022, w.media

’s SQL Interface, Aims to Accelerate Open Innovation
17 June 2020, global.toshiba

provided by Google News

RavenDB Launches Version 6.0 Lightning Fast Queries, Data Integrations, Corax Indexing Engine, and Sharding
3 October 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

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

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

provided by Google News

Share this page