DBMS > GigaSpaces vs. SiteWhere vs. SQLite vs. TinkerGraph

System Properties Comparison GigaSpaces vs. SiteWhere vs. SQLite vs. TinkerGraph

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

High performance in-memory data grid platform, powering three products: Smart Cache, Smart ODS (Operational Data Store), Smart Augmented Transactions

M2M integration platform for persisting/querying time series data

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

A lightweight, in-memory graph engine that serves as a reference implementation of the TinkerPop3 API

Primary database model

Document store
Object oriented DBMS

Values are user defined objects

Time Series DBMS

Relational DBMS

Graph DBMS

Secondary database models

Graph DBMS
Search engine

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

Score	1.03
Rank	#188	Overall
	#32	Document stores
	#6	Object oriented DBMS

Score	0.06
Rank	#383	Overall
	#43	Time Series DBMS

Score	111.41
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Score	0.13
Rank	#345	Overall
	#35	Graph DBMS

Website

www.gigaspaces.com

github.com/sitewhere/sitewhere

www.sqlite.org

tinkerpop.apache.org/docs/current/reference/#tinkergraph-gremlin

Technical documentation

docs.gigaspaces.com/latest/landing.html

sitewhere1.sitewhere.io/index.html

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

Developer

Gigaspaces Technologies

SiteWhere

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Initial release

2000

2010

2000

2009

Current release

15.5, September 2020

3.46.0 (23 May 2024), May 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache Version 2; Commercial licenses available

Open Source

Common Public Attribution License Version 1.0

Open Source

Public Domain

Open Source

Apache 2.0

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++, .Net

Java

Server operating systems

Linux
macOS
Solaris
Windows

Linux
OS X
Windows

server-less

Data scheme

schema-free

predefined scheme

yes

dynamic column types

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

not rigid because of 'dynamic typing' concept.

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.

XML can be used for describing objects metadata

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-99 for query and DML statements

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

APIs and other access methods

GigaSpaces LRMI
Hibernate
JCache
JDBC
JPA
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API
Spring Data

HTTP REST

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

TinkerPop 3

Supported programming languages

.Net
C++
Java
Python
Scala

Actionscript
Ada
Basic
C
C#
C++
D
Delphi
Forth
Fortran
Haskell
Java
JavaScript
Lisp
Lua
MatLab
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
PL/SQL
Python
R
Ruby
Scala
Scheme
Smalltalk
Tcl

Groovy
Java

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Triggers

yes, event driven architecture

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

based on HBase

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication

synchronous or asynchronous
Source-replica replication

synchronous or asynchronous

selectable replication factor

based on HBase

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Map-Reduce pattern can be built with XAP task executors

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Consistency level configurable: ALL, QUORUM, ANY

Immediate Consistency

none

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Relationships in graphs

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

via file-system locks

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

optional

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

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

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.