DBMS > Amazon Neptune vs. EsgynDB vs. IBM Cloudant vs. Postgres-XL

System Properties Comparison Amazon Neptune vs. EsgynDB vs. IBM Cloudant vs. Postgres-XL

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Fast, reliable graph database built for the cloud

Enterprise-class SQL-on-Hadoop solution, powered by Apache Trafodion

Database as a Service offering based on Apache CouchDB

Based on PostgreSQL enhanced with MPP and write-scale-out cluster features

Primary database model

Secondary database models

Document store
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	2.29
Rank	#113	Overall
	#9	Graph DBMS
	#5	RDF stores

Score	0.25
Rank	#312	Overall
	#138	Relational DBMS

Score	2.75
Rank	#104	Overall
	#19	Document stores

Score	0.53
Rank	#254	Overall
	#117	Relational DBMS

Website

aws.amazon.com/neptune

www.esgyn.cn

www.ibm.com/products/cloudant

www.postgres-xl.org

Technical documentation

aws.amazon.com/neptune/developer-resources

cloud.ibm.com/docs/Cloudant

www.postgres-xl.org/documentation

Developer

Amazon

Esgyn

IBM, Apache Software Foundation

IBM acquired Cloudant in February 2014

Initial release

2017

2015

2010

2014

since 2012, originally named StormDB

Current release

10 R1, October 2018

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Mozilla public license

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

C++, Java

Erlang

Server operating systems

hosted

Linux

hosted

Linux
macOS

Data scheme

schema-free

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

XML type, but no XML query functionality

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

distributed, parallel query execution

APIs and other access methods

OpenCypher
RDF 1.1 / SPARQL 1.1
TinkerPop Gremlin

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

RESTful HTTP/JSON API

ADO.NET
JDBC
native C library
ODBC
streaming API for large objects

Supported programming languages

C#
Go
Java
JavaScript
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scala

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC/ADO.Net

C#
Java
JavaScript
Objective-C
PHP
Ruby

.Net
C
C++
Delphi
Erlang
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Perl
PHP
Python
Tcl

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Java Stored Procedures

View functions (Map-Reduce) in JavaScript

user defined functions

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

horizontal partitioning

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-availability zones high availability, asynchronous replication for up to 15 read replicas within a single region. Global database clusters consists of a primary write DB cluster in one region, and up to five secondary read DB clusters in different regions. Each secondary region can have up to 16 reader instances.

Multi-source replication between multi datacenters

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

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Relationships in graphs

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

atomic operations within a document possible

ACID

MVCC

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Optimistic locking

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

with encyption-at-rest

yes

In-memory capabilities

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

User concepts

Access control

Access rights for users and roles can be defined via the AWS Identity and Access Management (IAM)

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Access rights for users can be defined per database

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.

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

Exploring new features of Apache TinkerPop 3.7.x in Amazon Neptune | Amazon Web Services
7 June 2024, AWS Blog

Building NHM London's Planetary Knowledge Base with Amazon Neptune and the Registry of Open Data on AWS ...
5 June 2024, AWS Blog

Unit testing Apache TinkerPop transactions: From TinkerGraph to Amazon Neptune | Amazon Web Services
3 June 2024, AWS Blog

AWS announces Amazon Neptune I/O-Optimized
22 February 2024, AWS Blog

AWS Weekly Roundup: LlamaIndex support for Amazon Neptune, force AWS CloudFormation stack deletion, and more ...
27 May 2024, AWS Blog

provided by Google News

Cloudant Best (and Worst) Practices — Part 1
18 March 2019, ibm.com

Intro to Enterprise Cloud Storage: How to Set Up a Cloudant Database
1 December 2014, Linux.com

IBM Expands Cloud Database Services with Kubernetes
26 September 2019, EnterpriseAI

IBM Code Engine and IBM Cloudant: Serverless Data and Infrastructure
16 August 2021, ibm.com

IBM to Purchase Cloudant Database as a service (DBaaS) Provider
22 March 2014, App Developer Magazine

provided by Google News

Share this page