DBMS > AgensGraph vs. Google Cloud Datastore vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. SAP SQL Anywhere vs. SQLite

System Properties Comparison AgensGraph vs. Google Cloud Datastore vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. SAP SQL Anywhere vs. SQLite

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

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

Automatically scaling NoSQL Database as a Service (DBaaS) on the Google Cloud Platform

A Wide Column Store for rapid development using massive semi-structured datasets

RDBMS database and synchronization technologies for server, desktop, remote office, and mobile environments

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
Relational DBMS

Document store

Wide column store

Relational DBMS

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

Score	0.23
Rank	#315	Overall
	#26	Graph DBMS
	#140	Relational DBMS

Score	4.36
Rank	#72	Overall
	#12	Document stores

Score	4.04
Rank	#77	Overall
	#6	Wide column stores

Score	3.95
Rank	#80	Overall
	#42	Relational DBMS

Score	111.41
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Website

bitnine.net/agensgraph

cloud.google.com/datastore

azure.microsoft.com/en-us/services/storage/tables

www.sap.com/products/technology-platform/sql-anywhere.html

www.sqlite.org

Technical documentation

bitnine.net/documentation

cloud.google.com/datastore/docs

help.sap.com/docs/SAP_SQL_Anywhere

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

Developer

Bitnine Global Inc.

Google

Microsoft

SAP

formerly Sybase

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Initial release

2016

2008

2012

1992

2000

Current release

2.1, December 2018

17, July 2015

3.46.0 (23 May 2024), May 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache License 2.0

commercial

Open Source

Public Domain

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.

Implementation language

Server operating systems

Linux
OS X
Windows

hosted

AIX
HP-UX
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

server-less

Data scheme

depending on used data model

schema-free

yes

dynamic column types

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

yes, details here

yes

not rigid because of 'dynamic typing' concept.

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

SQL-like query language (GQL)

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

APIs and other access methods

Cypher Query Language
JDBC

gRPC (using protocol buffers) API
RESTful HTTP/JSON API

RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET
HTTP API
JDBC
ODBC

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

Supported programming languages

C
Java
JavaScript
Python

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

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

C
C#
C++
Delphi
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby

Actionscript
Ada
Basic
C
C#
C++
D
Delphi
Forth
Fortran
Haskell
Java
JavaScript
Lisp
Lua
MatLab
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
PL/SQL
Python
R
Ruby
Scala
Scheme
Smalltalk
Tcl

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

using Google App Engine

yes, in C/C++, Java, .Net or Perl

Triggers

Callbacks using the Google Apps Engine

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

no, but can be realized using table inheritance

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Source-replica replication

Multi-source replication using Paxos

yes

implicit feature of the cloud service. Replication either local, cross-facility or geo-redundant.

Source-replica replication

Database mirroring

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

using Google Cloud Dataflow

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on type of query and configuration

Strong Consistency is default for entity lookups and queries within an Entity Group (but can instead be made eventually consistent). Other queries are always eventual consistent.

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

via ReferenceProperties or Ancestor paths

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Serializable Isolation within Transactions, Read Committed outside of Transactions

optimistic locking

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

via file-system locks

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

Access rights for users, groups and roles based on Google Cloud Identity and Access Management (IAM)

Access rights based on private key authentication or shared access signatures

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.