DBMS > JaguarDB vs. OpenQM vs. OrigoDB vs. Snowflake vs. TinkerGraph

System Properties Comparison JaguarDB vs. OpenQM vs. OrigoDB vs. Snowflake vs. TinkerGraph

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Performant, highly scalable DBMS for AI and IoT applications

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

A fully ACID in-memory object graph database

Cloud-based data warehousing service for structured and semi-structured data

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

Primary database model

Key-value store
Vector DBMS

Multivalue DBMS

Document store
Object oriented DBMS

Relational DBMS

Graph DBMS

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

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

Score	0.34
Rank	#284	Overall
	#10	Multivalue DBMS

Score	0.06
Rank	#380	Overall
	#50	Document stores
	#18	Object oriented DBMS

Score	130.36
Rank	#8	Overall
	#5	Relational DBMS

Score	0.13
Rank	#345	Overall
	#35	Graph DBMS

Website

www.jaguardb.com

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

origodb.com

www.snowflake.com

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

Technical documentation

www.jaguardb.com/support.html

origodb.com/docs

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

Developer

DataJaguar, Inc.

Rocket Software, originally Martin Phillips

Robert Friberg et al

Snowflake Computing Inc.

Initial release

2015

1993

2009

under the name LiveDB

2014

2009

Current release

3.3 July 2023

3.4-12

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

GPL V3.0

Open Source

GPLv2, extended commercial license available

Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache 2.0

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++

the server part. Clients available in other languages

Java

Server operating systems

Linux

AIX
FreeBSD
Linux
macOS
Raspberry Pi
Solaris
Windows

Linux
Windows

hosted

Data scheme

yes

with some exceptions

yes

support of semi-structured data formats (JSON, XML, Avro)

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

User defined using .NET types and collections

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

can be achieved using .NET

yes

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

A subset of ANSI SQL is implemented

but no views, foreign keys, triggers

yes

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

.NET Client API
HTTP API
LINQ

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

TinkerPop 3

Supported programming languages

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

.Net
Basic
C
Java
Objective C
PHP
Python

.Net

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

Groovy
Java

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

user defined functions

Triggers

yes

Domain Events

similar concept for controling cloud resources

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

yes

horizontal partitioning

client side managed; servers are not synchronized

yes

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication

yes

Source-replica replication

yes

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

depending on model

yes

Relationships in graphs

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

optional

In-memory capabilities

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

yes

User concepts

Access control

rights management via user accounts

Access rights can be defined down to the item level

Role based authorization

Users with fine-grained authorization concept, user roles and pluggable authentication

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.