DBMS > AlaSQL vs. JaguarDB vs. Lovefield vs. SiteWhere vs. TigerGraph

System Properties Comparison AlaSQL vs. JaguarDB vs. Lovefield vs. SiteWhere vs. TigerGraph

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

JavaScript DBMS library

Performant, highly scalable DBMS for AI and IoT applications

Embeddable relational database for web apps written in pure JavaScript

M2M integration platform for persisting/querying time series data

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

Primary database model

Document store
Relational DBMS

Key-value store
Vector DBMS

Relational DBMS

Time Series DBMS

Graph DBMS

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

Score	0.46
Rank	#260	Overall
	#40	Document stores
	#121	Relational DBMS

Score	0.00
Rank	#383	Overall
	#60	Key-value stores
	#13	Vector DBMS

Score	0.29
Rank	#293	Overall
	#133	Relational DBMS

Score	0.06
Rank	#356	Overall
	#35	Time Series DBMS

Score	1.83
Rank	#139	Overall
	#13	Graph DBMS

Website

alasql.org

www.jaguardb.com

google.github.io/lovefield

github.com/sitewhere/sitewhere

www.tigergraph.com

Technical documentation

github.com/AlaSQL/alasql

www.jaguardb.com/support.html

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

sitewhere1.sitewhere.io/index.html

docs.tigergraph.com

Developer

Andrey Gershun & Mathias R. Wulff

DataJaguar, Inc.

Google

SiteWhere

Initial release

2014

2015

2014

2010

2017

Current release

3.3 July 2023

2.1.12, February 2017

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

MIT-License

Open Source

GPL V3.0

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

Common Public Attribution License Version 1.0

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++

the server part. Clients available in other languages

JavaScript

Java

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
OS X
Windows

Linux

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

predefined scheme

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.

A subset of ANSI SQL is implemented

but no views, foreign keys, triggers

SQL-like query language

via JavaScript builder pattern

SQL-like query language (GSQL)

APIs and other access methods

JavaScript API

JDBC
ODBC

HTTP REST

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

Supported programming languages

JavaScript

C
C++
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scala

JavaScript

C++
Java

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Triggers

yes

Using read-only observers

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

none

Sharding

based on HBase

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

Multi-source replication

none

selectable replication factor

based on HBase

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

none

Eventual Consistency

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

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

rights management via user accounts

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

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

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

provided by Google News

SiteWhere: An open platform for connected devices
11 July 2017, Open Source For You

11 Best Open source IoT Platforms To Develop Smart Projects
9 March 2023, H2S Media

provided by Google News

TigerGraph Unveils CoPilot, Version 4.0, and New CEO
30 April 2024, Datanami

How TigerGraph CoPilot enables graph-augmented AI
30 April 2024, InfoWorld

TigerGraph unveils GenAI assistant, introduces new CEO
30 April 2024, TechTarget

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

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

provided by Google News

Share this page