DBMS > AnzoGraph DB vs. CrateDB vs. Hyprcubd vs. Snowflake

System Properties Comparison AnzoGraph DB vs. CrateDB vs. Hyprcubd vs. Snowflake

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Hyprcubd seems to be discontinued. Therefore it 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

Distributed Database based on Lucene

Serverless Time Series DBMS

Cloud-based data warehousing service for structured and semi-structured data

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
RDF store

Document store
Spatial DBMS
Search engine
Time Series DBMS
Vector DBMS

Time Series DBMS

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

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	0.71
Rank	#227	Overall
	#37	Document stores
	#5	Spatial DBMS
	#16	Search engines
	#19	Time Series DBMS
	#10	Vector DBMS

Score	130.36
Rank	#8	Overall
	#5	Relational DBMS

Website

cambridgesemantics.com/anzograph

cratedb.com

hyprcubd.com (offline)

www.snowflake.com

Technical documentation

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

cratedb.com/docs

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

Developer

Cambridge Semantics

Crate

Hyprcubd, Inc.

Snowflake Computing Inc.

Initial release

2018

2013

2014

Current release

2.3, January 2021

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free trial version available

Open Source

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

Java

Server operating systems

Linux

All Operating Systems, including Kubernetes with CrateDB Kubernetes Operator support

hosted

Data scheme

Schema-free and OWL/RDFS-schema support

Flexible Schema (defined schema, partial schema, schema free)

yes

support of semi-structured data formats (JSON, XML, Avro)

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

time, int, uint, float, string

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

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

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

yes, but no triggers and constraints, and PostgreSQL compatibility

SQL-like query language

yes

APIs and other access methods

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

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
PostgreSQL wire protocol
Prometheus Remote Read/Write
RESTful HTTP API

gRPC (https)

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

C++
Java
Python

.NET
Erlang
Go

community maintained client
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)

community maintained client
Perl

community maintained client
PHP
Python
R
Ruby

community maintained client
Scala

community maintained client

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions and aggregates

user defined functions (Javascript)

user defined functions

Triggers

similar concept for controling cloud resources

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Automatic sharding

Sharding

yes

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication in MPP-Cluster

Configurable replication on table/partition-level

yes

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

Eventual Consistency
Read-after-write consistency on record level

Eventual Consistency

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

unique row identifiers can be used for implementing an optimistic concurrency control strategy

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

rights management via user accounts

token access

Users with fine-grained authorization concept, user roles and pluggable authentication

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.