DBMS > AnzoGraph DB vs. Datomic vs. OpenEdge vs. OpenQM

System Properties Comparison AnzoGraph DB vs. Datomic vs. OpenEdge vs. OpenQM

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

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

Application development environment with integrated database management system

QpenQM is a high-performance, self-tuning, multi-value DBMS

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
RDF store

Relational DBMS

Multivalue 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	1.66
Rank	#144	Overall
	#66	Relational DBMS

Score	3.45
Rank	#85	Overall
	#46	Relational DBMS

Score	0.34
Rank	#284	Overall
	#10	Multivalue DBMS

Website

cambridgesemantics.com/anzograph

www.datomic.com

www.progress.com/openedge

www.rocketsoftware.com/products/rocket-multivalue-application-development-platform/rocket-open-qm

Technical documentation

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

docs.datomic.com

documentation.progress.com/output/ua/OpenEdge_latest

Developer

Cambridge Semantics

Cognitect

Progress Software Corporation

Rocket Software, originally Martin Phillips

Initial release

2018

2012

1984

1993

Current release

2.3, January 2021

1.0.7075, December 2023

OpenEdge 12.2, March 2020

3.4-12

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free trial version available

commercial

limited edition free

commercial

Open Source

GPLv2, extended commercial license available

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

Server operating systems

Linux

All OS with a Java VM

AIX
HP-UX
Linux
Solaris
Windows

AIX
FreeBSD
Linux
macOS
Raspberry Pi
Solaris
Windows

Data scheme

Schema-free and OWL/RDFS-schema support

yes

with some exceptions

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.

yes

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

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

yes

close to SQL 92

APIs and other access methods

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

RESTful HTTP API

JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

C++
Java
Python

Clojure
Java

Progress proprietary ABL (Advanced Business Language)

.Net
Basic
C
Java
Objective C
PHP
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions and aggregates

yes

Transaction Functions

yes

Triggers

By using transaction functions

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Automatic sharding

none

But extensive use of caching in the application peers

horizontal partitioning

since Version 11.4

yes

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

Source-replica replication

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

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

Users and groups

Access rights can be defined down to the item level

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

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

Comparing Graph Databases II. Part 2: ArangoDB, OrientDB, and… | by Sam Bell
20 September 2019, Towards Data Science

provided by Google News

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

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

James Dixon Imagines A Data Lake That Matters
26 January 2015, Forbes

Zoona Case Study
16 December 2017, AWS Blog

provided by Google News

OpenEdge Application Development | Progress OpenEdge
14 September 2014, Progress Software

What's New in OpenEdge 12.8
15 April 2024, release.nl

PoC Exploit Released for OpenEdge Authentication Gateway & AdminServer Vulnerability
11 March 2024, GBHackers

provided by Google News

Share this page