DBMS > HEAVY.AI vs. Infobright vs. mSQL vs. OrigoDB vs. Prometheus

System Properties Comparison HEAVY.AI vs. Infobright vs. mSQL vs. OrigoDB vs. Prometheus

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

High performant column-oriented DBMS for analytic workloads using MySQL or PostgreSQL as a frontend

mSQL (Mini SQL) is a simple and lightweight RDBMS

A fully ACID in-memory object graph database

Open-source Time Series DBMS and monitoring system

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Document store
Object oriented DBMS

Time Series DBMS

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	1.00
Rank	#193	Overall
	#90	Relational DBMS

Score	1.67
Rank	#151	Overall
	#70	Relational DBMS

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

Score	7.92
Rank	#51	Overall
	#2	Time Series DBMS

Website

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

ignitetech.com/softwarelibrary/infobrightdb

hughestech.com.au/products/msql

origodb.com

prometheus.io

Technical documentation

docs.heavy.ai

origodb.com/docs

prometheus.io/docs

Developer

HEAVY.AI, Inc.

Ignite Technologies Inc.; formerly InfoBright Inc.

Hughes Technologies

Robert Friberg et al

Initial release

2016

2005

1994

2009

under the name LiveDB

2015

Current release

5.10, January 2022

4.4, October 2021

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache Version 2; enterprise edition available

commercial

The open source (GPLv2) version did not support inserts/updates/deletes and was discontinued with July 2016

commercial

free licenses can be provided

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

C++ and CUDA

Server operating systems

Linux

Linux
Windows

AIX
HP-UX
Linux
OS X
Solaris SPARC/x86
Windows

Linux
Windows

Data scheme

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

User defined using .NET types and collections

Numeric data only

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.

can be achieved using .NET

Import of XML data possible

Secondary indexes

Knowledge Grid Technology used instead

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

A subset of ANSI SQL is implemented

no subqueries, aggregate functions, views, foreign keys, triggers

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC
Thrift
Vega

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

JDBC
ODBC

.NET Client API
HTTP API
LINQ

RESTful HTTP/JSON API

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC/Thrift
Python

.Net
C
C#
C++
D
Eiffel
Erlang
Haskell
Java
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scheme
Tcl

C
C++
Delphi
Java
Perl
PHP
Tcl

.Net

.Net
C++
Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python
Ruby

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Triggers

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

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication

Source-replica replication

none

Source-replica replication

yes

by Federation

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

none

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

depending on model

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

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

exploiting MySQL or PostgreSQL frontend capabilities

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

Recent citations in the news

Big Data Analytics: A Game Changer for Infrastructure
13 July 2023, Spiceworks News and Insights

HEAVY.AI Launches HEAVY 7.0, Introducing Real-Time Machine Learning Capabilities
19 April 2023, Business Wire

HEAVY.AI Partners with Bain, Maxar, and Nvidia to Provide Digital Twins for Telecom Networks
16 February 2023, Datanami

Making the most of geospatial intelligence
14 April 2023, InfoWorld

The insideBIGDATA IMPACT 50 List for Q4 2023
11 October 2023, insideBIGDATA

provided by Google News

Make Your MySQL Server More Secure With These 7 Steps - MUO
1 December 2022, MakeUseOf

Writing a Web Service in Perl
9 July 2003, PCQuest

Higher Education PS rules out ghost students before PAC - Zambia
29 November 2018, diggers.news

provided by Google News

VictoriaMetrics Offers Prometheus Replacement for Time Series Monitoring
17 July 2023, The New Stack

How to reduce Istio sidecar metric cardinality with Amazon Managed Service for Prometheus | Amazon Web Services
10 October 2023, AWS Blog

A Comprehensive Comparison of Prometheus and Grafana in 2023
8 December 2023, hackernoon.com

Consider Grafana vs. Prometheus for your time-series tools
18 October 2021, TechTarget

M3
7 August 2018, Uber

provided by Google News

Share this page