DBMS > AnzoGraph DB vs. EJDB vs. Hypertable vs. SQLite

System Properties Comparison AnzoGraph DB vs. EJDB vs. Hypertable vs. SQLite

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Hypertable has stopped its further development with March 2016 and is removed 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

Embeddable document-store database library with JSON representation of queries (in MongoDB style)

An open source BigTable implementation based on distributed file systems such as Hadoop

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

Primary database model

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	0.27
Rank	#297	Overall
	#44	Document stores

Score	114.32
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Website

cambridgesemantics.com/anzograph

github.com/Softmotions/ejdb

www.sqlite.org

Technical documentation

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

github.com/Softmotions/ejdb/blob/master/README.md

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

Developer

Cambridge Semantics

Softmotions

Hypertable Inc.

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Initial release

2018

2012

2009

2000

Current release

2.3, January 2021

0.9.8.11, March 2016

3.45.3 (15 April 2024), April 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free trial version available

Open Source

GPLv2

Open Source

GNU version 3. Commercial license available

Open Source

Public Domain

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

server-less

Linux
OS X
Windows

an inofficial Windows port is available

server-less

Data scheme

Schema-free and OWL/RDFS-schema support

schema-free

yes

dynamic column types

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

string, integer, double, bool, date, object_id

yes

not rigid because of 'dynamic typing' concept.

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

restricted

only exact value or prefix value scans

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

in-process shared library

C++ API
Thrift

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

Supported programming languages

C++
Java
Python

Actionscript
C
C#
C++
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Lua
Objective-C
Pike
Python
Ruby

C++
Java
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby

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

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions and aggregates

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Automatic sharding

none

Sharding

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication in MPP-Cluster

none

selectable replication factor on file system level

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Kerberos/HDFS data loading

yes

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

typically not needed, however similar functionality with collection joins possible

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Read/Write Locking

yes

via file-system locks

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

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.