DBMS > RavenDB vs. SpaceTime vs. TimescaleDB vs. ToroDB

System Properties Comparison RavenDB vs. SpaceTime vs. TimescaleDB vs. ToroDB

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

ToroDB seems to be discontinued. Therefore it is excluded from the DB-Engines Ranking.

Description

Open Source Operational and Transactional Enterprise NoSQL Document Database

SpaceTime is a spatio-temporal DBMS with a focus on performance.

A time series DBMS optimized for fast ingest and complex queries, based on PostgreSQL

A MongoDB-compatible JSON document store, built on top of PostgreSQL

Primary database model

Secondary database models

Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS
Time Series DBMS

Relational DBMS

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

Score	3.01
Rank	#101	Overall
	#17	Document stores

Score	0.00
Rank	#396	Overall
	#8	Spatial DBMS

Score	4.87
Rank	#74	Overall
	#4	Time Series DBMS

Website

ravendb.net

www.mireo.com/spacetime

www.timescale.com

github.com/torodb/server

Technical documentation

ravendb.net/docs

docs.timescale.com

Developer

Hibernating Rhinos

Mireo

Timescale

8Kdata

Initial release

2010

2020

2017

2016

Current release

5.4, July 2022

2.13.0, November 2023

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

AGPL version 3, commercial license available

commercial

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

AGPL-V3

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

Server operating systems

Linux
macOS
Raspberry Pi
Windows

Linux

Linux
OS X
Windows

All OS with a Java 7 VM

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

numerics, strings, booleans, arrays, JSON blobs, geospatial dimensions, currencies, binary data, other complex data types

yes

string, integer, double, boolean, date, object_id

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

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language (RQL)

A subset of ANSI SQL is implemented

yes

full PostgreSQL SQL syntax

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

RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET
JDBC
native C library
ODBC
streaming API for large objects

Supported programming languages

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

C#
C++
Python

.Net
C
C++
Delphi
Java

JDBC
JavaScript
Perl
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Scheme
Tcl

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

user defined functions, PL/pgSQL, PL/Tcl, PL/Perl, PL/Python, PL/Java, PL/PHP, PL/R, PL/Ruby, PL/Scheme, PL/Unix shell

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

Fixed-grid hypercubes

yes, across time and space (hash partitioning) attributes

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication

Real-time block device replication (DRBD)

Source-replica replication with hot standby and reads on replicas

Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

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

Eventual Consistency
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

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

yes

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Access rights for users and roles

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

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

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

RavenDB Adds Graph Queries
15 May 2019, Datanami

Review: NoSQL database RavenDB
20 March 2019, TechGenix

provided by Google News

TimescaleDB Is a Vector Database Now, Too
25 September 2023, Datanami

Timescale Acquires PopSQL to Bring a Modern, Collaborative SQL GUI to PostgreSQL Developers
4 April 2024, PR Newswire

Visualizing IoT Data at Scale With Hopara and TimescaleDB
16 May 2023, Embedded Computing Design

Power IoT and time-series workloads with TimescaleDB for Azure Database for PostgreSQL
18 March 2019, azure.microsoft.com

Timescale Valuation Rockets to Over $1B with $110M Round, Marking the Explosive Rise of Time-Series Data
22 February 2022, Business Wire

provided by Google News

Share this page