DBMS > JaguarDB vs. Machbase Neo vs. ObjectBox vs. TinkerGraph vs. Valentina Server

System Properties Comparison JaguarDB vs. Machbase Neo vs. ObjectBox vs. TinkerGraph vs. Valentina Server

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Performant, highly scalable DBMS for AI and IoT applications

TimeSeries DBMS for AIoT and BigData

Lightweight, fast on-device database for IoT, Mobile and Embedded devices, persisting and synchronising objects and vectors

A lightweight, in-memory graph engine that serves as a reference implementation of the TinkerPop3 API

Object-relational database and reports server

Primary database model

Key-value store
Vector DBMS

Time Series DBMS

Object oriented DBMS
Vector DBMS

Graph DBMS

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Time Series DBMS

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

Score	0.06
Rank	#381	Overall
	#59	Key-value stores
	#15	Vector DBMS

Score	0.17
Rank	#337	Overall
	#30	Time Series DBMS

Score	1.29
Rank	#166	Overall
	#5	Object oriented DBMS
	#7	Vector DBMS

Score	0.13
Rank	#345	Overall
	#35	Graph DBMS

Score	0.21
Rank	#325	Overall
	#144	Relational DBMS

Website

www.jaguardb.com

machbase.com

github.com/objectbox
objectbox.io

tinkerpop.apache.org/docs/current/reference/#tinkergraph-gremlin

www.valentina-db.net

Technical documentation

www.jaguardb.com/support.html

machbase.com/dbms

docs.objectbox.io

valentina-db.com/docs/dokuwiki/v5/doku.php

Developer

DataJaguar, Inc.

Machbase

ObjectBox Limited

Paradigma Software

Initial release

2015

2013

2017

2009

1999

Current release

3.3 July 2023

V8.0, August 2023

4.0 (May 2024)

5.7.5

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

GPL V3.0

commercial

free test version available

Bindings are released under Apache 2.0

Apache License 2.0

Open Source

Apache 2.0

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

C++

the server part. Clients available in other languages

C and C++

Java

Server operating systems

Linux

Linux
macOS
Windows

Android
Any POSIX system
Docker
iOS
Linux
macOS
QNX
Windows

Linux
OS X
Windows

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

yes, plus "flex" map-like types

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.

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

A subset of ANSI SQL is implemented

but no views, foreign keys, triggers

SQL-like query language

yes

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

gRPC
HTTP REST
JDBC
MQTT (Message Queue Telemetry Transport)
ODBC

Proprietary native API

TinkerPop 3

ODBC

Supported programming languages

C
C++
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scala

C
C#
C++
Go
Java
JavaScript
PHP

via ODBC
Python
R

via ODBC
Scala

C
C++
Dart (Flutter)
Go
Java
Kotlin
Python
Swift

Groovy
Java

.Net
C
C#
C++
Objective-C
PHP
Ruby
Visual Basic
Visual Basic.NET

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication

selectable replication factor

Data sync between devices allowing occasional connected databases to work completely offline

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Eventual Consistency

Immediate Consistency

none

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Relationships in graphs

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

yes

optional

yes

In-memory capabilities

Is there an option to define some or all structures to be held in-memory only.

yes

volatile and lookup table

yes

User concepts

Access control

rights management via user accounts

simple password-based access control

yes

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

More information provided by the system vendor

News

The on-device Vector Database for Android and Java
29 May 2024

Vector search: making sense of search queries
29 May 2024

Python on-device Vector and Object Database for Local AI
28 May 2024

Evolution of search: traditional vs vector search
23 May 2024

On-device Vector Database for Dart/Flutter
21 May 2024

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

ObjectBox Raises $2M in Funding
4 December 2018, FinSMEs

The Megashift Towards Decentralized Edge Computing
27 August 2021, hackernoon.com

provided by Google News

Unit testing Apache TinkerPop transactions: From TinkerGraph to Amazon Neptune | Amazon Web Services
3 June 2024, AWS Blog

Simple Deployment of a Graph Database: JanusGraph | by Edward Elson Kosasih
12 October 2020, Towards Data Science

Why developers like Apache TinkerPop, an open source framework for graph computing | Amazon Web Services
27 September 2021, AWS Blog

InfiniteGraph Gets Support for Common Graph Database Language and More
21 February 2012, SiliconANGLE News

Introducing Gremlin query hints for Amazon Neptune | AWS Database Blog
26 February 2019, AWS Blog

provided by Google News

A Look at Valentina — SitePoint
18 April 2014, SitePoint

MySQL GUI Tools for Windows and Ubuntu/Linux: Top 8 free or open source
7 December 2018, H2S Media

provided by Google News

Share this page