DBMS > AgensGraph vs. Amazon Aurora vs. FatDB vs. MySQL

System Properties Comparison AgensGraph vs. Amazon Aurora vs. FatDB vs. MySQL

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

FatDB/FatCloud has ceased operations as a company with February 2014. FatDB is discontinued and excluded from the ranking.

Description

Multi-model database supporting relational and graph data models and built upon PostgreSQL

MySQL and PostgreSQL compatible cloud service by Amazon

A .NET NoSQL DBMS that can integrate with and extend SQL Server.

Widely used open source RDBMS

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
Relational DBMS

Relational DBMS

Document store
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Key/Value like access via memcached API

Secondary database models

Document store

Document store
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	0.16
Rank	#333	Overall
	#30	Graph DBMS
	#146	Relational DBMS

Score	8.50
Rank	#49	Overall
	#31	Relational DBMS

Score	1087.72
Rank	#2	Overall
	#2	Relational DBMS

Website

bitnine.net/agensgraph

aws.amazon.com/rds/aurora

www.mysql.com

Technical documentation

bitnine.net/documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonRDS/latest/AuroraUserGuide/CHAP_Aurora.html

dev.mysql.com/doc

Developer

Bitnine Global Inc.

Amazon

FatCloud

Oracle

since 2010, originally MySQL AB, then Sun

Initial release

2016

2015

2012

1995

Current release

2.1, December 2018

8.3.0, January 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache License 2.0

commercial

Open Source

GPL version 2. Commercial licenses with extended functionallity are available

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.

Aiven for MySQL: Fully managed MySQL, deployable in the cloud of your choice, with seamless integrations and lightning-fast setup.

Implementation language

C and C++

Server operating systems

Linux
OS X
Windows

hosted

Windows

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

Data scheme

depending on used data model

yes

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

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

Via inetgration in SQL Server

yes

with proprietary extensions

APIs and other access methods

Cypher Query Language
JDBC

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

.NET Client API
LINQ
RESTful HTTP API
RPC
Windows WCF Bindings

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
Proprietary native API

Supported programming languages

C
Java
JavaScript
Python

Ada
C
C#
C++
D
Delphi
Eiffel
Erlang
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scheme
Tcl

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

via applications

yes

proprietary syntax

Triggers

yes

via applications

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

no, but can be realized using table inheritance

horizontal partitioning

Sharding

horizontal partitioning, sharding with MySQL Cluster or MySQL Fabric

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Source-replica replication

selectable replication factor

Multi-source 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

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

not for MyISAM storage engine

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

not for MyISAM storage engine

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

table locks or row locks depending on storage engine

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

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Can implement custom security layer via applications

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

no user groups or 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.