DBMS > Prometheus vs. RavenDB vs. Trafodion vs. Transbase

System Properties Comparison Prometheus vs. RavenDB vs. Trafodion vs. Transbase

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Apache Trafodion has been retired in 2021. Therefore it is excluded from the DB-Engines Ranking.

Description

Open-source Time Series DBMS and monitoring system

Open Source Operational and Transactional Enterprise NoSQL Document Database

Transactional SQL-on-Hadoop DBMS

A resource-optimized, high-performance, universally applicable RDBMS

Primary database model

Time Series DBMS

Document store

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS
Time Series DBMS

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

Score	7.92
Rank	#51	Overall
	#2	Time Series DBMS

Score	3.01
Rank	#101	Overall
	#17	Document stores

Score	0.15
Rank	#337	Overall
	#147	Relational DBMS

Website

prometheus.io

ravendb.net

trafodion.apache.org

www.transaction.de/en/products/transbase.html

Technical documentation

prometheus.io/docs

ravendb.net/docs

trafodion.apache.org/documentation.html

www.transaction.de/en/products/transbase/features.html

Developer

Hibernating Rhinos

Apache Software Foundation, originally developed by HP

Transaction Software GmbH

Initial release

2015

2010

2014

1987

Current release

5.4, July 2022

2.3.0, February 2019

Transbase 8.3, 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

AGPL version 3, commercial license available

Open Source

Apache 2.0

commercial

free development license

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++, Java

C and C++

Server operating systems

Linux
Windows

Linux
macOS
Raspberry Pi
Windows

Linux

FreeBSD
Linux
macOS
Solaris
Windows

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

Numeric data only

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.

Import of XML data possible

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language (RQL)

yes

APIs and other access methods

RESTful HTTP/JSON API

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

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
Proprietary native API

Supported programming languages

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

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

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC/ADO.Net

C
C#
C++
Java
JavaScript
Kotlin
Objective-C
PHP
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Java Stored Procedures

yes

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

by Federation

Multi-source replication

yes, via HBase

Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

via user defined functions and HBase

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

none

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, Cluster-wide transaction available

ACID

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.

User concepts

Access control

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

Recent citations in the 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

Linux System Monitoring with Prometheus, Grafana, and collectd
1 February 2024, Linux Journal

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

provided by Google News

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

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

How I Created a RavenDB Python Client
23 September 2016, Visual Studio Magazine

RavenDB Adds Graph Queries
15 May 2019, Datanami

Review: NoSQL database RavenDB
20 March 2019, TechGenix

provided by Google News

HP Throws Trafodion Hat into OLTP Hadoop Ring
14 July 2014, Datanami

Evaluating HTAP Databases for Machine Learning Applications
2 November 2016, KDnuggets

Low-latency, distributed database architectures are critical for emerging fog applications
7 April 2022, Embedded Computing Design

provided by Google News

Share this page