DBMS > Hypertable vs. OpenQM vs. RavenDB vs. RocksDB vs. TempoIQ

System Properties Comparison Hypertable vs. OpenQM vs. RavenDB vs. RocksDB vs. TempoIQ

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Hypertable has stopped its further development with March 2016 and is removed from the DB-Engines ranking.

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

Description

An open source BigTable implementation based on distributed file systems such as Hadoop

QpenQM is a high-performance, self-tuning, multi-value DBMS

Open Source Operational and Transactional Enterprise NoSQL Document Database

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

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

Primary database model

Secondary database models

Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS
Time Series DBMS

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

Score	0.27
Rank	#298	Overall
	#10	Multivalue DBMS

Score	2.92
Rank	#101	Overall
	#18	Document stores

Score	3.65
Rank	#85	Overall
	#11	Key-value stores

Website

www.rocketsoftware.com/products/rocket-multivalue-application-development-platform/rocket-open-qm

ravendb.net

rocksdb.org

tempoiq.com (offline)

Technical documentation

ravendb.net/docs

github.com/facebook/rocksdb/wiki

Developer

Hypertable Inc.

Rocket Software, originally Martin Phillips

Hibernating Rhinos

Facebook, Inc.

TempoIQ

Initial release

2009

1993

2010

2013

2012

Current release

0.9.8.11, March 2016

3.4-12

5.4, July 2022

8.11.4, April 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

GNU version 3. Commercial license available

Open Source

GPLv2, extended commercial license available

Open Source

AGPL version 3, commercial license available

Open Source

BSD

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++

Server operating systems

Linux
OS X
Windows

an inofficial Windows port is available

AIX
FreeBSD
Linux
macOS
Raspberry Pi
Solaris
Windows

Linux
macOS
Raspberry Pi
Windows

Linux

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

with some exceptions

schema-free

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

Secondary indexes

restricted

only exact value or prefix value scans

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language (RQL)

APIs and other access methods

C++ API
Thrift

.NET Client API
F# Client API
Go Client API
Java Client API
NodeJS Client API
PHP Client API
Python Client API
RESTful HTTP API

C++ API
Java API

HTTP API

Supported programming languages

C++
Java
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby

.Net
Basic
C
Java
Objective C
PHP
Python

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

C
C++
Go
Java
Perl
Python
Ruby

C#
Java
JavaScript

Node.js
Python
Ruby

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Triggers

yes

Realtime Alerts

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

yes

Sharding

horizontal partitioning

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

selectable replication factor on file system level

yes

Multi-source replication

yes

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

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

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

ACID, Cluster-wide transaction available

yes

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

Access rights can be defined down to the item level

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.