DBMS > AnzoGraph DB vs. Badger vs. Google Cloud Spanner vs. Yaacomo

System Properties Comparison AnzoGraph DB vs. Badger vs. Google Cloud Spanner vs. Yaacomo

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Yaacomo seems to be discontinued and is removed 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.

A horizontally scalable, globally consistent, relational database service. It is the externalization of the core Google database that runs the biggest aspects of Google, like Ads and Google Play.

OpenCL based in-memory RDBMS, designed for efficiently utilizing the hardware via parallel computing

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	0.29
Rank	#303	Overall
	#25	Graph DBMS
	#14	RDF stores

Score	0.22
Rank	#320	Overall
	#47	Key-value stores

Score	2.84
Rank	#100	Overall
	#51	Relational DBMS

Website

cambridgesemantics.com/anzograph

github.com/dgraph-io/badger

cloud.google.com/spanner

yaacomo.com

Technical documentation

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

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

cloud.google.com/spanner/docs

Developer

Cambridge Semantics

DGraph Labs

Google

Q2WEB GmbH

Initial release

2018

2017

2009

Current release

2.3, January 2021

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free trial version available

Open Source

Apache 2.0

commercial

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

Server operating systems

Linux

BSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

hosted

Android
Linux
Windows

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

Query statements complying to ANSI 2011

yes

APIs and other access methods

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

gRPC (using protocol buffers) API
JDBC

At present, JDBC supports read-only queries. No support for DDL or DML statements.
RESTful HTTP API

JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

C++
Java
Python

Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions and aggregates

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Automatic sharding

none

Sharding

horizontal partitioning

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication in MPP-Cluster

none

Multi-source replication with 3 replicas for regional instances.

Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Kerberos/HDFS data loading

yes

using Google Cloud Dataflow

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

by using interleaved tables, this features focuses more on performance improvements than on referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Strict serializable isolation

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

Access rights for users, groups and roles based on Google Cloud Identity and Access Management (IAM)

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

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

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

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

provided by Google News

Google Improves Cloud Spanner: More Compute and Storage without Price Increase
14 October 2023, InfoQ.com

Google turns up the heat on AWS, claims Cloud Spanner is half the cost of DynamoDB
11 October 2023, TechCrunch

Google makes its Cloud Spanner database service faster and more cost-efficient
11 October 2023, SiliconANGLE News

Google Cloud just fired a major volley at AWS as the cloud wars heat up
12 October 2023, TechRadar

Google Spanner: When Do You Need to Move to It?
11 September 2023, hackernoon.com

provided by Google News

Share this page