DBMS > AnzoGraph DB vs. DataFS vs. JaguarDB vs. Lovefield

System Properties Comparison AnzoGraph DB vs. DataFS vs. JaguarDB vs. Lovefield

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

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

All data is stored inside objects which are linked by so-called link attributes. Objects consist of classes which can be extended and de-extended at runtime. Graphs can be defined with a struct.

Performant, highly scalable DBMS for AI and IoT applications

Embeddable relational database for web apps written in pure JavaScript

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
RDF store

Object oriented DBMS

Key-value store
Vector DBMS

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Graph 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	0.09
Rank	#360	Overall
	#17	Object oriented DBMS

Score	0.06
Rank	#381	Overall
	#59	Key-value stores
	#13	Vector DBMS

Score	0.33
Rank	#286	Overall
	#131	Relational DBMS

Website

cambridgesemantics.com/anzograph

newdatabase.com

www.jaguardb.com

google.github.io/lovefield

Technical documentation

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

dev.mobiland.com/Overview.xsp

www.jaguardb.com/support.html

github.com/google/lovefield/blob/master/docs/spec_index.md

Developer

Cambridge Semantics

Mobiland AG

DataJaguar, Inc.

Google

Initial release

2018

2015

2014

Current release

2.3, January 2021

1.1.263, October 2022

3.3 July 2023

2.1.12, February 2017

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free trial version available

commercial

Open Source

GPL V3.0

Open Source

Apache 2.0

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

C++

the server part. Clients available in other languages

JavaScript

Server operating systems

Linux

Windows

Linux

server-less, requires a JavaScript environment (browser, Node.js)

tested with Chrome, Firefox, IE, Safari

Data scheme

Schema-free and OWL/RDFS-schema support

Classes, Structs, and Lists are written in proprietary DataTypeDefinitionLanguage (.dtdl) and Objects consisting of those are written in proprietary DataAccessDefinitionLanguage (.dadl)

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.

A subset of ANSI SQL is implemented

but no views, foreign keys, triggers

SQL-like query language

via JavaScript builder pattern

APIs and other access methods

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

.NET Client API
Proprietary client DLL
WinRT client

JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

C++
Java
Python

.Net
C
C#
C++
VB.Net

C
C++
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scala

JavaScript

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions and aggregates

Triggers

no, except callback-events from server when changes happened

Using read-only observers

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Automatic sharding

Proprietary Sharding system

Sharding

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication in MPP-Cluster

Multi-source replication

none

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

Immediate Consistency

Eventual 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

yes, by using IndexedDB or the cloud service Firebase Realtime Database

In-memory capabilities

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

yes

using MemoryDB

User concepts

Access control

Access rights for users and roles

Windows-Profile

rights management via user accounts

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

Share this page