DBMS > HEAVY.AI vs. Oracle Berkeley DB vs. OrigoDB vs. RocksDB

System Properties Comparison HEAVY.AI vs. Oracle Berkeley DB vs. OrigoDB vs. RocksDB

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

A high performance, column-oriented RDBMS, specifically developed to harness the massive parallelism of modern CPU and GPU hardware

Widely used in-process key-value store

A fully ACID in-memory object graph database

Embeddable persistent key-value store optimized for fast storage (flash and RAM)

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Key-value store

supports sorted and unsorted key sets
Native XML DBMS

in the Oracle Berkeley DB XML version

Document store
Object oriented DBMS

Key-value store

Secondary database models

Spatial DBMS

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

Score	2.10
Rank	#126	Overall
	#61	Relational DBMS

Score	2.52
Rank	#114	Overall
	#20	Key-value stores
	#3	Native XML DBMS

Score	0.03
Rank	#378	Overall
	#51	Document stores
	#18	Object oriented DBMS

Score	4.00
Rank	#84	Overall
	#11	Key-value stores

Website

github.com/heavyai/heavydb
www.heavy.ai

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

origodb.com

rocksdb.org

Technical documentation

docs.heavy.ai

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

origodb.com/docs

github.com/facebook/rocksdb/wiki

Developer

HEAVY.AI, Inc.

Oracle

originally developed by Sleepycat, which was acquired by Oracle

Robert Friberg et al

Facebook, Inc.

Initial release

2016

1994

2009

under the name LiveDB

2013

Current release

5.10, January 2022

18.1.40, May 2020

8.11.4, April 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache Version 2; enterprise edition available

Open Source

commercial license available

Open Source

BSD

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++ and CUDA

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

C++

Server operating systems

Linux

AIX
Android
FreeBSD
iOS
Linux
OS X
Solaris
VxWorks
Windows

Linux
Windows

Linux

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

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

only with the Berkeley DB XML edition

can be achieved using .NET

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

SQL interfaced based on SQLite is available

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC
Thrift
Vega

.NET Client API
HTTP API
LINQ

C++ API
Java API

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC/Thrift
Python

.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

.Net

C
C++
Go
Java
Perl
Python
Ruby

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Triggers

yes

only for the SQL API

yes

Domain Events

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

Round robin

none

horizontal partitioning

client side managed; servers are not synchronized

horizontal partitioning

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication

Source-replica replication

yes

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

depending on model

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

yes

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

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Role based authorization

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.