DBMS > Graph Engine vs. Hawkular Metrics vs. Oracle Berkeley DB vs. Yaacomo

System Properties Comparison Graph Engine vs. Hawkular Metrics vs. Oracle Berkeley DB vs. Yaacomo

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Yaacomo seems to be discontinued and is removed from the DB-Engines ranking

Description

A distributed in-memory data processing engine, underpinned by a strongly-typed RAM store and a general distributed computation engine

Hawkular metrics is the metric storage of the Red Hat sponsored Hawkular monitoring system. It is based on Cassandra.

Widely used in-process key-value store

OpenCL based in-memory RDBMS, designed for efficiently utilizing the hardware via parallel computing

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
Key-value store

Time Series DBMS

Key-value store

supports sorted and unsorted key sets
Native XML DBMS

in the Oracle Berkeley DB XML version

Relational DBMS

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

Score	0.61
Rank	#240	Overall
	#21	Graph DBMS
	#35	Key-value stores

Score	0.00
Rank	#379	Overall
	#40	Time Series DBMS

Score	2.21
Rank	#117	Overall
	#20	Key-value stores
	#3	Native XML DBMS

Website

www.graphengine.io

www.hawkular.org

www.oracle.com/database/technologies/related/berkeleydb.html

yaacomo.com

Technical documentation

www.graphengine.io/docs/manual

www.hawkular.org/hawkular-metrics/docs/user-guide

docs.oracle.com/cd/E17076_05/html/index.html

Developer

Microsoft

Community supported by Red Hat

Oracle

originally developed by Sleepycat, which was acquired by Oracle

Q2WEB GmbH

Initial release

2010

2014

1994

2009

Current release

18.1.40, May 2020

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

MIT License

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

commercial license available

commercial

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

.NET and C

Java

C, Java, C++ (depending on the Berkeley DB edition)

Server operating systems

.NET

Linux
OS X
Windows

AIX
Android
FreeBSD
iOS
Linux
OS X
Solaris
VxWorks
Windows

Android
Linux
Windows

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

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.

yes

only with the Berkeley DB XML edition

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

SQL interfaced based on SQLite is available

yes

APIs and other access methods

RESTful HTTP API

HTTP REST

JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

C#
C++
F#
Visual Basic

Go
Java
Python
Ruby

.Net

Figaro is a .Net framework assembly that extends Berkeley DB XML into an embeddable database engine for .NET
others

Third-party libraries to manipulate Berkeley DB files are available for many languages
C
C#
C++
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)

3rd party binding
Perl
Python
Tcl

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Triggers

yes

via Hawkular Alerting

yes

only for the SQL API

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

horizontal partitioning

Sharding

based on Cassandra

none

horizontal partitioning

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

selectable replication factor

based on Cassandra

Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Eventual Consistency

based on Cassandra
Immediate Consistency

based on Cassandra

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

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

optional: either by committing a write-ahead log (WAL) to the local persistent storage or by dumping the memory to a persistent storage

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

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

Recent citations in the news

Trinity
2 June 2023, Microsoft

Open source Microsoft Graph Engine takes on Neo4j
13 February 2017, InfoWorld

Aerospike Is Now a Graph Database, Too
21 June 2023, Datanami

IBM releases Graph, a service that can outperform SQL databases
27 July 2016, GeekWire

The graph analytics landscape 2019 - DataScienceCentral.com
27 February 2019, Data Science Central

provided by Google News

Waiting for Red Hat OpenShift 4.0? Too late, 4.1 has already arrived… • DEVCLASS
5 June 2019, DevClass

provided by Google News

ACM recognizes far-reaching technical achievements with special awards
26 May 2021, EurekAlert

Margo I. Seltzer | Berkman Klein Center
18 August 2020, Berkman Klein Center

Database Trends Report: SQL Beats NoSQL, MySQL Most Popular -- ADTmag
5 March 2019, ADT Magazine

How to store financial market data for backtesting
26 January 2019, Towards Data Science

The importance of bitcoin nodes and how to start one
9 May 2014, The Merkle News

provided by Google News

Share this page