DBMS > OpenQM vs. RavenDB vs. Teradata vs. Yaacomo

System Properties Comparison OpenQM vs. RavenDB vs. Teradata vs. Yaacomo

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Yaacomo seems to be discontinued and is removed from the DB-Engines ranking

Description

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

Open Source Operational and Transactional Enterprise NoSQL Document Database

A hybrid cloud data analytics software platform (Teradata Vantage)

OpenCL based in-memory RDBMS, designed for efficiently utilizing the hardware via parallel computing

Primary database model

Multivalue DBMS

Document store

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS
Time Series DBMS

Document store
Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS
Time Series DBMS

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

Score	0.34
Rank	#284	Overall
	#10	Multivalue DBMS

Score	2.84
Rank	#101	Overall
	#18	Document stores

Score	44.87
Rank	#22	Overall
	#15	Relational DBMS

Website

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

ravendb.net

www.teradata.com

yaacomo.com

Technical documentation

ravendb.net/docs

docs.teradata.com

Developer

Rocket Software, originally Martin Phillips

Hibernating Rhinos

Teradata

Q2WEB GmbH

Initial release

1993

2010

1984

2009

Current release

3.4-12

5.4, July 2022

Teradata Vantage 1.0 MU2, January 2019

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

GPLv2, extended commercial license available

Open Source

AGPL version 3, commercial license available

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

Server operating systems

AIX
FreeBSD
Linux
macOS
Raspberry Pi
Solaris
Windows

Linux
macOS
Raspberry Pi
Windows

hosted
Linux

Android
Linux
Windows

Data scheme

yes

with some exceptions

schema-free

yes

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

yes

Join-index to prejoin tables, aggregate index, sparse index, hash index

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language (RQL)

yes

SQL 2016 + extensions

yes

APIs and other access methods

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

.NET Client API
HTTP REST
JDBC
JMS Adapter
ODBC
OLE DB

JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

.Net
Basic
C
Java
Objective C
PHP
Python

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

C
C++
Cobol
Java (JDBC-ODBC)
Perl
PL/1
Python
R
Ruby

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

UDFs, stored procedures, table functions in parallel

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

yes

Sharding

Hashing

horizontal partitioning

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Multi-source replication

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

Source-replica replication

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.

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

ACID, Cluster-wide transaction available

ACID

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

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

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

DB-Engines blog posts

Teradata is the most popular data warehouse DBMS
2 April 2013, Paul Andlinger

show all

Recent citations in the news

RavenDB Launches Version 6.0 Lightning Fast Queries, Data Integrations, Corax Indexing Engine, and Sharding
3 October 2023, PR Newswire

Install the NoSQL RavenDB Data System
14 May 2021, The New Stack

RavenDB Adds Graph Queries
15 May 2019, Datanami

Review: NoSQL database RavenDB
20 March 2019, TechGenix

RavenDB Welcomes David Baruc as Chief Revenue Officer: Seasoned Tech Leader to Drive Global Sales and ...
13 June 2023, PR Newswire

provided by Google News

Teradata Co. (NYSE:TDC) Given Average Rating of “Hold” by Analysts
16 June 2024, Defense World

TERADATA ALERT: Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C. Announces that a Class Action Lawsuit Has Been Filed Against ...
15 June 2024, GlobeNewswire

SHAREHOLDER ALERT: Pomerantz Law Firm Reminds Shareholders with Losses on their Investment in Teradata ...
15 June 2024, PR Newswire

Teradata Stock: Much More Enticing Now Than Last Year, But Uncertainty Lingers (NYSE:TDC)
14 June 2024, Seeking Alpha

Is There Now An Opportunity In Teradata Corporation (NYSE:TDC)?
11 June 2024, Simply Wall St

provided by Google News

Share this page