DBMS > AnzoGraph DB vs. Badger vs. Datomic vs. Drizzle

System Properties Comparison AnzoGraph DB vs. Badger vs. Datomic vs. Drizzle

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Drizzle has published its last release in September 2012. The open-source project is discontinued and Drizzle is excluded from the DB-Engines ranking.

Description

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

An embeddable, persistent, simple and fast Key-Value Store, written purely in Go.

Datomic builds on immutable values, supports point-in-time queries and uses 3rd party systems for durability

MySQL fork with a pluggable micro-kernel and with an emphasis of performance over compatibility.

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
RDF store

Key-value store

Relational 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	0.14
Rank	#331	Overall
	#49	Key-value stores

Score	1.59
Rank	#150	Overall
	#69	Relational DBMS

Website

cambridgesemantics.com/anzograph

github.com/dgraph-io/badger

www.datomic.com

Technical documentation

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

godoc.org/github.com/dgraph-io/badger

docs.datomic.com

Developer

Cambridge Semantics

DGraph Labs

Cognitect

Drizzle project, originally started by Brian Aker

Initial release

2018

2017

2012

2008

Current release

2.3, January 2021

1.0.6735, June 2023

7.2.4, September 2012

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free trial version available

Open Source

Apache 2.0

commercial

limited edition free

Open Source

GNU GPL

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, Clojure

C++

Server operating systems

Linux

BSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

All OS with a Java VM

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X

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.

yes

with proprietary extensions

APIs and other access methods

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

RESTful HTTP API

JDBC

Supported programming languages

C++
Java
Python

Clojure
Java

C
C++
Java
PHP

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions and aggregates

yes

Transaction Functions

Triggers

By using transaction functions

hooks for callbacks inside the server can be used.

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Automatic sharding

none

But extensive use of caching in the application peers

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication in MPP-Cluster

none

But extensive use of caching in the application peers

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Kerberos/HDFS data loading

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency in MPP-Cluster

none

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

not needed in graphs

yes

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

using external storage systems (e.g. Cassandra, DynamoDB, PostgreSQL, Couchbase and others)

yes

In-memory capabilities

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

yes

recommended only for testing and development

User concepts

Access control

Access rights for users and roles

Pluggable authentication mechanisms

e.g. LDAP, HTTP

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

DB-Engines blog posts

MySQL won the April ranking; did its forks follow?
1 April 2015, Paul Andlinger

Has MySQL finally lost its mojo?
1 July 2013, Matthias Gelbmann

show all

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

Stanchion Turns SQLite Into A Column Store
15 February 2024, iProgrammer

Nubank buys firm behind Clojure programming language
28 July 2020, Finextra

Zoona Case Study
16 December 2017, AWS Blog

Architecting Software for Leverage
13 November 2021, InfoQ.com

TerminusDB Takes on Data Collaboration with a git-Like Approach
1 December 2020, The New Stack

provided by Google News

Share this page