DBMS > Hawkular Metrics vs. InfinityDB vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. OrigoDB

System Properties Comparison Hawkular Metrics vs. InfinityDB vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. OrigoDB

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines
Name	Hawkular Metrics  Xexclude from comparison	InfinityDB  Xexclude from comparison	Microsoft Azure Table Storage  Xexclude from comparison	OrigoDB  Xexclude from comparison
Description	Hawkular metrics is the metric storage of the Red Hat sponsored Hawkular monitoring system. It is based on Cassandra.	A Java embedded Key-Value Store which extends the Java Map interface	A Wide Column Store for rapid development using massive semi-structured datasets	A fully ACID in-memory object graph database
Primary database model	Time Series DBMS	Key-value store	Wide column store	Document store Object oriented DBMS
DB-Engines Ranking measures the popularity of database management systems Trend Chart	Score 0.08 Rank #366   Overall #39   Time Series DBMS	Score 0.08 Rank #365   Overall #55   Key-value stores	Score 4.04 Rank #77   Overall #6   Wide column stores	Score 0.06 Rank #380   Overall #50   Document stores #18   Object oriented DBMS
Website	www.hawkular.org	boilerbay.com	azure.microsoft.com/­en-us/­services/­storage/­tables	origodb.com
Technical documentation	www.hawkular.org/­hawkular-metrics/­docs/­user-guide	boilerbay.com/­infinitydb/­manual		origodb.com/­docs
Developer	Community supported by Red Hat	Boiler Bay Inc.	Microsoft	Robert Friberg et al
Initial release	2014	2002	2012	2009 under the name LiveDB
Current release		4.0
License Commercial or Open Source	Open Source Apache 2.0	commercial	commercial	Open Source
Cloud-based only Only available as a cloud service	no	no	yes	no
DBaaS offerings (sponsored links) Database as a Service Providers of DBaaS offerings, please contact us to be listed.
Implementation language	Java	Java		C#
Server operating systems	Linux OS X Windows	All OS with a Java VM	hosted	Linux Windows
Data scheme	schema-free	yes nested virtual Java Maps, multi-value, logical ‘tuple space’ runtime Schema upgrade	schema-free	yes
Typing predefined data types such as float or date	yes	yes all Java primitives, Date, CLOB, BLOB, huge sparse arrays	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.	no	no	no	no can be achieved using .NET
Secondary indexes	no	no manual creation possible, using inversions based on multi-value capability	no	yes
SQL Support of SQL	no	no	no	no
APIs and other access methods	HTTP REST	Access via java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentNavigableMap Interface Proprietary API to InfinityDB ItemSpace (boilerbay.com/­docs/­ItemSpaceDataStructures.htm)	RESTful HTTP API	.NET Client API HTTP API LINQ
Supported programming languages	Go Java Python Ruby	Java	.Net C# C++ Java JavaScript (Node.js) PHP Python Ruby	.Net
Server-side scripts Stored procedures	no	no	no	yes
Triggers	yes via Hawkular Alerting	no	no	yes Domain Events
Partitioning methods Methods for storing different data on different nodes	Sharding based on Cassandra	none	Sharding Implicit feature of the cloud service	horizontal partitioning client side managed; servers are not synchronized
Replication methods Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes	selectable replication factor based on Cassandra	none	yes implicit feature of the cloud service. Replication either local, cross-facility or geo-redundant.	Source-replica replication
MapReduce Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods	no	no	no	no
Consistency concepts Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system	Eventual Consistency based on Cassandra Immediate Consistency based on Cassandra	Immediate Consistency READ-COMMITTED or SERIALIZED	Immediate Consistency
Foreign keys Referential integrity	no	no manual creation possible, using inversions based on multi-value capability	no	depending on model
Transaction concepts Support to ensure data integrity after non-atomic manipulations of data	no	ACID Optimistic locking for transactions; no isolation for bulk loads	optimistic locking	ACID
Concurrency Support for concurrent manipulation of data	yes	yes	yes	yes
Durability Support for making data persistent	yes	yes	yes	yes Write ahead log
In-memory capabilities Is there an option to define some or all structures to be held in-memory only.	no	no	no	yes
User concepts Access control	no	no	Access rights based on private key authentication or shared access signatures	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.
Related products and services We invite representatives of vendors of related products to contact us for presenting information about their offerings here.
More resources
	Hawkular Metrics	InfinityDB	Microsoft Azure Table Storage	OrigoDB
Recent citations in the news	Waiting for Red Hat OpenShift 4.0? Too late, 4.1 has already arrived… • DEVCLASS 5 June 2019, DevClass provided by Google News		Working with Azure to Use and Manage Data Lakes 7 March 2024, Simplilearn How to Use C# Azure.Data.Tables SDK with Azure Cosmos DB 9 July 2021, hackernoon.com How to use Azure Table storage in .Net 14 January 2019, InfoWorld Quick Guide to Azure Storage Pricing 16 May 2023, DevOps.com How to write data to Azure Table Store with an Azure Function 14 April 2017, Experts Exchange provided by Google News

Share this page