DBMS > AnzoGraph DB vs. ArcadeDB vs. FatDB vs. TigerGraph

System Properties Comparison AnzoGraph DB vs. ArcadeDB vs. FatDB vs. TigerGraph

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

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

Fast and scalable multi-model DBMS, originally forked from OrientDB but most of the code has been rewritten

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

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

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
RDF store

Document store
Graph DBMS
Key-value store
Time Series DBMS

in next version

Document store
Key-value store

Graph DBMS

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

Score	0.23
Rank	#307	Overall
	#24	Graph DBMS
	#13	RDF stores

Score	0.02
Rank	#366	Overall
	#50	Document stores
	#38	Graph DBMS
	#53	Key-value stores
	#36	Time Series DBMS

Score	1.83
Rank	#139	Overall
	#13	Graph DBMS

Website

cambridgesemantics.com/anzograph

arcadedb.com

www.tigergraph.com

Technical documentation

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

docs.arcadedb.com

docs.tigergraph.com

Developer

Cambridge Semantics

Arcade Data

FatCloud

Initial release

2018

2021

2012

2017

Current release

2.3, January 2021

September 2021

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free trial version available

Open Source

Apache Version 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

Java

C++

Server operating systems

Linux

All OS with a Java VM

Windows

Linux

Data scheme

Schema-free and OWL/RDFS-schema support

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.

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

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

SQL-like query language, no joins

Via inetgration in SQL Server

SQL-like query language (GSQL)

APIs and other access methods

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

JDBC
MongoDB API
OpenCypher
PostgreSQL wire protocol
Redis API
RESTful HTTP/JSON API
TinkerPop Gremlin

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

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

Supported programming languages

C++
Java
Python

Java

C++
Java

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions and aggregates

yes

via applications

yes

Triggers

yes

via applications

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Automatic sharding

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication in MPP-Cluster

Source-replica replication

selectable replication factor

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

Immediate Consistency in MPP-Cluster

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

not needed in graphs

yes

relationship in graphs

yes

Relationships in graphs

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

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

Access rights for users and roles

Can implement custom security layer via applications

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

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

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

Is The Enterprise Knowledge Graph Finally Going To Make All Data Usable?
19 September 2018, Forbes

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

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

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

provided by Google News

Share this page