DBMS > AnzoGraph DB vs. Drizzle vs. ScyllaDB vs. Trafodion

System Properties Comparison AnzoGraph DB vs. Drizzle vs. ScyllaDB vs. Trafodion

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.

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

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

Cassandra and DynamoDB compatible wide column store

Transactional SQL-on-Hadoop DBMS

Primary database model

Secondary database models

Key-value store

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

Score	0.23
Rank	#307	Overall
	#24	Graph DBMS
	#13	RDF stores

Score	4.75
Rank	#68	Overall
	#5	Wide column stores

Website

cambridgesemantics.com/anzograph

www.scylladb.com

trafodion.apache.org

Technical documentation

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

docs.scylladb.com

trafodion.apache.org/documentation.html

Developer

Cambridge Semantics

Drizzle project, originally started by Brian Aker

ScyllaDB

Apache Software Foundation, originally developed by HP

Initial release

2018

2008

2015

2014

Current release

2.3, January 2021

7.2.4, September 2012

ScyllaDB Open Source 5.4.1, January 2024

2.3.0, February 2019

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free trial version available

Open Source

GNU GPL

Open Source

Open Source (AGPL), commercial license available

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.

Scylla Cloud: Create real-time applications that run at global scale with Scylla Cloud, the industry’s most powerful NoSQL DBaaS

Implementation language

C++

C++, Java

Server operating systems

Linux

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X

Linux

Data scheme

Schema-free and OWL/RDFS-schema support

yes

schema-free

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

cluster global secondary indices

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

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

yes

with proprietary extensions

SQL-like DML and DDL statements (CQL)

yes

APIs and other access methods

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

JDBC

Proprietary protocol (CQL)

compatible with CQL (Cassandra Query Language, an SQL-like language)
RESTful HTTP API (DynamoDB compatible)
Thrift

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

C++
Java
Python

C
C++
Java
PHP

For CQL interface: C#, C++, Clojure, Erlang, Go, Haskell, Java, JavaScript, Node.js, Perl, PHP, Python, Ruby, Rust, Scala
For DynamoDB interface: .Net, ColdFusion, Erlang, Groovy, Java, JavaScript, Perl, PHP, Python, Ruby

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC/ADO.Net

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions and aggregates

yes, Lua

Java Stored Procedures

Triggers

hooks for callbacks inside the server can be used.

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Automatic sharding

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication in MPP-Cluster

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

selectable replication factor

Representation of geographical distribution of servers is possible

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

Eventual Consistency
Tunable Consistency

can be individually decided for each write operation

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

Atomicity and isolation are supported for single operations

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

In-memory capabilities

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

yes

in-memory tables

User concepts

Access control

Access rights for users and roles

Pluggable authentication mechanisms

e.g. LDAP, HTTP

Access rights for users can be defined per object

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

More information provided by the system vendor

Specific characteristics

ScyllaDB is engineered to deliver predictable performance at scale. It’s adopted...
» more

Competitive advantages

Highly-performant (efficiently utilizes full resources of a node and network; millions...
» more

Typical application scenarios

ScyllaDB is ideal for applications that require high throughput and low latency at...
» more

Key customers

Discord, Epic Games, Expedia, Zillow, Comcast, Disney+ Hotstar, Samsung, ShareChat,...
» more

Market metrics

ScyllaDB typically offers ~75% total cost of ownership savings, with ~5X higher throughput...
» more

Licensing and pricing models

ScyllaDB Open Source - free open source software (AGPL) ScyllaDB Enterprise - subscription-based...
» more

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

DB-Engines blog posts

MySQL won the April ranking; did its forks follow?
1 April 2015, Paul Andlinger

Has MySQL finally lost its mojo?
1 July 2013, Matthias Gelbmann

show all

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

Back to the future: Does graph database success hang on query language?
5 March 2018, ZDNet

Cambridge Semantics Fits AnzoGraph DB with More Speed, Free Access
23 January 2020, Solutions Review

provided by Google News

ScyllaDB Raises $43M to Take on MongoDB at Scale, Push Database Performance to New Levels
17 October 2023, Datanami

ScyllaDB on AWS is a NoSQL Database Built for Gigabyte-to-Petabyte Scale | Amazon Web Services
6 January 2023, AWS Blog

ScyllaDB Database Review | eWeek
21 August 2018, eWeek

Scylla vs Cassandra: Performance Comparison - DataScienceCentral.com
9 January 2020, Data Science Central

ScyllaDB Launches Scylla Cloud Database as a Service
14 April 2019, insideBIGDATA

provided by Google News

Evaluating HTAP Databases for Machine Learning Applications
2 November 2016, KDnuggets

HP Throws Trafodion Hat into OLTP Hadoop Ring
14 July 2014, Datanami

Low-latency, distributed database architectures are critical for emerging fog applications
7 April 2022, Embedded Computing Design

provided by Google News

Share this page