DBMS > AnzoGraph DB vs. Drizzle vs. Microsoft SQL Server vs. OrigoDB

System Properties Comparison AnzoGraph DB vs. Drizzle vs. Microsoft SQL Server vs. OrigoDB

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Drizzle has published its last release in September 2012. The open-source project is discontinued and Drizzle 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

MySQL fork with a pluggable micro-kernel and with an emphasis of performance over compatibility.

Microsofts flagship relational DBMS

A fully ACID in-memory object graph database

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
RDF store

Relational DBMS

Document store
Object oriented DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	0.27
Rank	#302	Overall
	#24	Graph DBMS
	#13	RDF stores

Score	829.80
Rank	#3	Overall
	#3	Relational DBMS

Score	0.03
Rank	#378	Overall
	#51	Document stores
	#18	Object oriented DBMS

Website

cambridgesemantics.com/anzograph

www.microsoft.com/en-us/sql-server

origodb.com

Technical documentation

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

learn.microsoft.com/en-US/sql/sql-server

origodb.com/docs

Developer

Cambridge Semantics

Drizzle project, originally started by Brian Aker

Microsoft

Robert Friberg et al

Initial release

2018

2008

1989

2009

under the name LiveDB

Current release

2.3, January 2021

7.2.4, September 2012

SQL Server 2022, November 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free trial version available

Open Source

GNU GPL

commercial

restricted free version is available

Open Source

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++

Server operating systems

Linux

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X

Linux
Windows

Data scheme

Schema-free and OWL/RDFS-schema support

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

User defined using .NET types and collections

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

can be achieved using .NET

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

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

yes

with proprietary extensions

yes

APIs and other access methods

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

JDBC

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
OLE DB
Tabular Data Stream (TDS)

.NET Client API
HTTP API
LINQ

Supported programming languages

C++
Java
Python

C
C++
Java
PHP

C#
C++
Delphi
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Visual Basic

.Net

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions and aggregates

Transact SQL, .NET languages, R, Python and (with SQL Server 2019) Java

yes

Triggers

hooks for callbacks inside the server can be used.

yes

Domain Events

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Automatic sharding

Sharding

tables can be distributed across several files (horizontal partitioning); sharding through federation

horizontal partitioning

client side managed; servers are not synchronized

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication in MPP-Cluster

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

yes, but depending on the SQL-Server Edition

Source-replica replication

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

depending on model

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

Write ahead log

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

Pluggable authentication mechanisms

e.g. LDAP, HTTP

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Role based authorization

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.