DBMS > AnzoGraph DB vs. Datomic vs. Snowflake vs. Trafodion

System Properties Comparison AnzoGraph DB vs. Datomic vs. Snowflake vs. Trafodion

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Apache Trafodion has been retired in 2021. 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

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

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

Transactional SQL-on-Hadoop DBMS

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
RDF store

Relational DBMS

DB-Engines Ranking measures the popularity of database management systems
Trend Chart

Score	0.22
Rank	#302	Overall
	#24	Graph DBMS
	#13	RDF stores

Score	1.55
Rank	#144	Overall
	#67	Relational DBMS

Score	133.72
Rank	#7	Overall
	#5	Relational DBMS

Website

cambridgesemantics.com/anzograph

www.datomic.com

www.snowflake.com

trafodion.apache.org

Technical documentation

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

docs.datomic.com

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

trafodion.apache.org/documentation.html

Developer

Cambridge Semantics

Cognitect

Snowflake Computing Inc.

Apache Software Foundation, originally developed by HP

Initial release

2018

2012

2014

Current release

2.3, January 2021

1.0.7180, July 2024

2.3.0, February 2019

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free trial version available

commercial

limited edition free

commercial

Open Source

Apache 2.0

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, Clojure

C++, Java

Server operating systems

Linux

All OS with a Java VM

hosted

Linux

Data scheme

Schema-free and OWL/RDFS-schema support

yes

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

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.

yes

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

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

yes

APIs and other access methods

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

RESTful HTTP API

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

C++
Java
Python

Clojure
Java

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC/ADO.Net

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions and aggregates

yes

Transaction Functions

user defined functions

Java Stored Procedures

Triggers

By using transaction functions

similar concept for controling cloud resources

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Automatic sharding

none

But extensive use of caching in the application peers

yes

Sharding

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

yes

yes, via HBase

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Kerberos/HDFS data loading

yes

via user defined functions and HBase

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

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.