DBMS > AnzoGraph DB vs. Datomic vs. SQLite vs. TinkerGraph

System Properties Comparison AnzoGraph DB vs. Datomic vs. SQLite vs. TinkerGraph

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

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

A lightweight, in-memory graph engine that serves as a reference implementation of the TinkerPop3 API

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
RDF store

Relational DBMS

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	1.66
Rank	#144	Overall
	#66	Relational DBMS

Score	111.41
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Score	0.13
Rank	#345	Overall
	#35	Graph DBMS

Website

cambridgesemantics.com/anzograph

www.datomic.com

www.sqlite.org

tinkerpop.apache.org/docs/current/reference/#tinkergraph-gremlin

Technical documentation

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

docs.datomic.com

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

Developer

Cambridge Semantics

Cognitect

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Initial release

2018

2012

2000

2009

Current release

2.3, January 2021

1.0.7075, December 2023

3.46.0 (23 May 2024), May 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free trial version available

commercial

limited edition free

Open Source

Public Domain

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

Java, Clojure

Java

Server operating systems

Linux

All OS with a Java VM

server-less

Data scheme

Schema-free and OWL/RDFS-schema support

yes

dynamic column types

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

not rigid because of 'dynamic typing' concept.

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

SQL-92 is not fully supported

APIs and other access methods

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

RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

TinkerPop 3

Supported programming languages

C++
Java
Python

Clojure
Java

Actionscript
Ada
Basic
C
C#
C++
D
Delphi
Forth
Fortran
Haskell
Java
JavaScript
Lisp
Lua
MatLab
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
PL/SQL
Python
R
Ruby
Scala
Scheme
Smalltalk
Tcl

Groovy
Java

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions and aggregates

yes

Transaction Functions

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

none

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

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

none

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

not needed in graphs

yes

Relationships in graphs

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

via file-system locks

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

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

yes

optional

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

yes

User concepts

Access control

Access rights for users and roles

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.