DBMS > AlaSQL vs. AnzoGraph DB vs. Lovefield vs. TigerGraph

System Properties Comparison AlaSQL vs. AnzoGraph DB vs. Lovefield vs. TigerGraph

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

JavaScript DBMS library

Scalable graph database built for online analytics and data harmonization with MPP scaling, high-performance analytical algorithms and reasoning, and virtualization

Embeddable relational database for web apps written in pure JavaScript

A complete, distributed, parallel graph computing platform supporting web-scale data analytics in real-time

Primary database model

Document store
Relational DBMS

Graph DBMS
RDF store

Relational DBMS

Graph DBMS

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

Score	0.49
Rank	#259	Overall
	#40	Document stores
	#120	Relational DBMS

Score	0.27
Rank	#302	Overall
	#24	Graph DBMS
	#13	RDF stores

Score	0.32
Rank	#290	Overall
	#132	Relational DBMS

Score	1.83
Rank	#141	Overall
	#13	Graph DBMS

Website

alasql.org

cambridgesemantics.com/anzograph

google.github.io/lovefield

www.tigergraph.com

Technical documentation

github.com/AlaSQL/alasql

docs.cambridgesemantics.com/anzograph/userdoc/home.htm

github.com/google/lovefield/blob/master/docs/spec_index.md

docs.tigergraph.com

Developer

Andrey Gershun & Mathias R. Wulff

Cambridge Semantics

Google

Initial release

2014

2018

2014

2017

Current release

2.3, January 2021

2.1.12, February 2017

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

MIT-License

commercial

free trial version available

Open Source

Apache 2.0

commercial

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

JavaScript

C++

Server operating systems

server-less, requires a JavaScript environment (browser, Node.js)

Linux

server-less, requires a JavaScript environment (browser, Node.js)

tested with Chrome, Firefox, IE, Safari

Linux

Data scheme

schema-free

Schema-free and OWL/RDFS-schema support

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.

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

Close to SQL99, but no user access control, stored procedures and host language bindings.

SPARQL and SPARQL* as primary query language. Cypher preview.

SQL-like query language

via JavaScript builder pattern

SQL-like query language (GSQL)

APIs and other access methods

JavaScript API

Apache Mule
gRPC
JDBC
Kafka
OData access for BI tools
OpenCypher
RESTful HTTP API
SPARQL

GSQL (TigerGraph Query Language)
Kafka
RESTful HTTP/JSON API

Supported programming languages

JavaScript

C++
Java
Python

JavaScript

C++
Java

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions and aggregates

yes

Triggers

yes

Using read-only observers

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Automatic sharding

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

Multi-source replication in MPP-Cluster

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Kerberos/HDFS data loading

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

none

Immediate Consistency in MPP-Cluster

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

not needed in graphs

yes

Relationships in graphs

Transaction concepts

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

yes

only for local storage and DOM-storage

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

by using IndexedDB, SQL.JS or proprietary FileStorage

yes

yes, by using IndexedDB or the cloud service Firebase Realtime Database

yes

In-memory capabilities

Is there an option to define some or all structures to be held in-memory only.

yes

using MemoryDB

User concepts

Access control

Access rights for users and roles

Role-based access control

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

Create a Marvel Database with SQL and Javascript, the easy way
2 July 2019, Towards Data Science

HarperDB - How and Why We Built It From The Ground Up on NodeJS
28 February 2021, hackernoon.com

Multi faceted data exploration in the browser using Leaflet and amCharts
3 May 2020, Towards Data Science

provided by Google News

AnzoGraph review: A graph database for deep analytics
15 April 2019, InfoWorld

Cambridge Semantics Unveils AnzoGraph DB with Geospatial Analytics
19 June 2020, Solutions Review

AnzoGraph: A W3C Standards-Based Graph Database | by Jo Stichbury
8 February 2019, Towards Data Science

Back to the future: Does graph database success hang on query language?
5 March 2018, ZDNet

Cambridge Semantics Fits AnzoGraph DB with More Speed, Free Access
23 January 2020, Solutions Review

provided by Google News

New TigerGraph CEO Refocuses Efforts on Enterprise Customers
31 July 2023, Datanami

TigerGraph update adds enterprise-scale capabilities
31 October 2023, TechTarget

Aerospike takes on Neo4j and TigerGraph with launch of graph database
20 June 2023, SiliconANGLE News

TigerGraph Bolsters DB for Enterprise Graph Workloads
1 November 2023, Datanami

TigerGraph partners with Pascal as master distributor for APJ region
10 January 2024, VnExpress International

provided by Google News

Share this page