Compare with

Comparison of ObjectDB embedded vs EclipseLink with Derby server

Each of the following tables focuses on a specific database operation, where the last table presents average results comparison.

Speed comparison of JPA database persistence operations (normalized score, higher is better)

Transaction Size =>Few EntitiesMany EntitiesAverage Score
 ObjectDB embeddedEclipseLink
Derby server
ObjectDB embeddedEclipseLink
Derby server
ObjectDB embeddedEclipseLink
Derby server
Basic Person Test1003.81003.11003.4
Element Collection Test1002.21001.51001.8
Inheritance Test1003.91002.91003.4
Indexing Test1005.21004.31004.7
Graph (Binary Tree) Test88.41.91001.794.21.8
Multithreading Test1006.11003.91005.0
All Tests98.13.81002.999.03.4

The results above show that in general ObjectDB embedded is much more efficient than EclipseLink with Derby server in persisting JPA entity objects to the database. Comparing the normalized speed of EclipseLink with Derby database server (3.4) to the normalized speed of ObjectDB embedded database (99.0) reveals that in these tests, ObjectDB embedded is 29.1 times faster than EclipseLink with Derby server.

A huge performance gap has been detected when using JPA element collections with large transaction size. Comparing the normalized speed of EclipseLink with Derby database server (1.5) to the normalized speed of ObjectDB embedded database (100) reveals that in that case, ObjectDB embedded is 66.7 times faster than EclipseLink with Derby server.

Speed comparison of JPA database retrieval operations (normalized score, higher is better)

Retrieval Size =>Few EntitiesMany EntitiesAverage Score
 ObjectDB embeddedEclipseLink
Derby server
ObjectDB embeddedEclipseLink
Derby server
ObjectDB embeddedEclipseLink
Derby server
Basic Person Test1006.410011.31008.8
Element Collection Test1001.81002.41002.1
Inheritance Test1003.710012.91008.3
Indexing Test1003.610012.81008.2
Graph (Binary Tree) Test1000.611000.731000.67
Multithreading Test1008.510019.810014.1
All Tests1004.110010.01007.0

The results above show that in general ObjectDB embedded is much more efficient than EclipseLink with Derby server in retrieving JPA entity objects from the database. Comparing the normalized speed of EclipseLink with Derby database server (7.0) to the normalized speed of ObjectDB embedded database (100) reveals that in these tests, ObjectDB embedded is 14.3 times faster than EclipseLink with Derby server.

A huge performance gap has been detected when using graphs of objects with small retrieval size. Comparing the normalized speed of EclipseLink with Derby database server (0.61) to the normalized speed of ObjectDB embedded database (100) reveals that in that case, ObjectDB embedded is 164 times faster than EclipseLink with Derby server.

Speed comparison of JPA database query operations (normalized score, higher is better)

Retrieval Size =>Few EntitiesMany EntitiesAverage Score
 ObjectDB embeddedEclipseLink
Derby server
ObjectDB embeddedEclipseLink
Derby server
ObjectDB embeddedEclipseLink
Derby server
Basic Person Test10045.81005.310025.6
Element Collection Test10035.21000.9910018.1
Inheritance Test10023.11005.910014.5
Indexing Test1002.510012.21007.4
Multithreading Test10034.31007.710021.0
All Tests10028.21006.410017.3

The results above show that in general ObjectDB embedded is much more efficient than EclipseLink with Derby server in executing the tested JPA queries. Comparing the normalized speed of EclipseLink with Derby database server (17.3) to the normalized speed of ObjectDB embedded database (100) reveals that in these tests, ObjectDB embedded is 5.8 times faster than EclipseLink with Derby server.

A huge performance gap has been detected when using JPA element collections with large retrieval size. Comparing the normalized speed of EclipseLink with Derby database server (0.99) to the normalized speed of ObjectDB embedded database (100) reveals that in that case, ObjectDB embedded is 101 times faster than EclipseLink with Derby server.

Speed comparison of JPA database update operations (normalized score, higher is better)

Transaction Size =>Few EntitiesMany EntitiesAverage Score
 ObjectDB embeddedEclipseLink
Derby server
ObjectDB embeddedEclipseLink
Derby server
ObjectDB embeddedEclipseLink
Derby server
Basic Person Test1003.91004.41004.1
Element Collection Test1001.71001.61001.6
Inheritance Test1004.61006.11005.3
Indexing Test1004.51007.61006.1
Graph (Binary Tree) Test1000.701000.421000.56
Multithreading Test1007.31004.81006.0
All Tests1003.81004.21004.0

The results above show that in general ObjectDB embedded is much more efficient than EclipseLink with Derby server in updating JPA entity objects in the database. Comparing the normalized speed of EclipseLink with Derby database server (4.0) to the normalized speed of ObjectDB embedded database (100) reveals that in these tests, ObjectDB embedded is 25.0 times faster than EclipseLink with Derby server.

A huge performance gap has been detected when using graphs of objects with large transaction size. Comparing the normalized speed of EclipseLink with Derby database server (0.42) to the normalized speed of ObjectDB embedded database (100) reveals that in that case, ObjectDB embedded is 238 times faster than EclipseLink with Derby server.

Speed comparison of JPA database removal operations (normalized score, higher is better)

Transaction Size =>Few EntitiesMany EntitiesAverage Score
 ObjectDB embeddedEclipseLink
Derby server
ObjectDB embeddedEclipseLink
Derby server
ObjectDB embeddedEclipseLink
Derby server
Basic Person Test1002.81003.91003.3
Element Collection Test1001.21000.551000.87
Inheritance Test1003.31003.71003.5
Indexing Test1004.91003.51004.2
Graph (Binary Tree) Test1000.511000.501000.51
Multithreading Test1004.81005.71005.3
All Tests1002.91003.01003.0

The results above show that in general ObjectDB embedded is much more efficient than EclipseLink with Derby server in deleting JPA entity objects from the database. Comparing the normalized speed of EclipseLink with Derby database server (3.0) to the normalized speed of ObjectDB embedded database (100) reveals that in these tests, ObjectDB embedded is 33.3 times faster than EclipseLink with Derby server.

A huge performance gap has been detected when using graphs of objects with large transaction size. Comparing the normalized speed of EclipseLink with Derby database server (0.50) to the normalized speed of ObjectDB embedded database (100) reveals that in that case, ObjectDB embedded is 200 times faster than EclipseLink with Derby server.

Comparison of JPA/Database speed - the averages (normalized score, higher is better)

Transaction/Retrieval SizeFew EntitiesMany EntitiesAverage Score
 ObjectDB embeddedEclipseLink
Derby server
ObjectDB embeddedEclipseLink
Derby server
ObjectDB embeddedEclipseLink
Derby server
Basic Person Test10012.51005.61009.1
Element Collection Test1008.41001.41004.9
Inheritance Test1007.71006.31007.0
Indexing Test1004.11008.11006.1
Graph (Binary Tree) Test97.10.931000.8398.50.88
Multithreading Test10012.21008.410010.3
All Tests99.67.91005.299.86.6

The results above show that in general ObjectDB embedded is much more efficient than EclipseLink with Derby server in performing JPA database operations. Comparing the normalized speed of EclipseLink with Derby database server (6.6) to the normalized speed of ObjectDB embedded database (99.8) reveals that in these tests, ObjectDB embedded is 15.1 times faster than EclipseLink with Derby server.

A huge performance gap has been detected when using graphs of objects with large transaction/retrieval size. Comparing the normalized speed of EclipseLink with Derby database server (0.83) to the normalized speed of ObjectDB embedded database (100) reveals that in that case, ObjectDB embedded is 120 times faster than EclipseLink with Derby server.

Other Head to Head DBMS/JPA Comparisons