DBMS > AnzoGraph DB vs. EXASOL vs. LevelDB vs. MaxDB vs. Snowflake

System Properties Comparison AnzoGraph DB vs. EXASOL vs. LevelDB vs. MaxDB vs. Snowflake

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

High-performance, in-memory, MPP database specifically designed for in-memory analytics.

Embeddable fast key-value storage library that provides an ordered mapping from string keys to string values

A robust and reliable RDBMS optimized to run all major SAP solutions

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

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	1.99
Rank	#124	Overall
	#58	Relational DBMS

Score	2.35
Rank	#111	Overall
	#19	Key-value stores

Score	2.32
Rank	#112	Overall
	#55	Relational DBMS

Score	121.33
Rank	#9	Overall
	#6	Relational DBMS

Website

cambridgesemantics.com/anzograph

www.exasol.com

github.com/google/leveldb

maxdb.sap.com

www.snowflake.com

Technical documentation

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

www.exasol.com/resources

github.com/google/leveldb/blob/main/doc/index.md

maxdb.sap.com/documentation

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

Developer

Cambridge Semantics

Exasol

Google

SAP, acquired from Software AG (Adabas-D) in 1997

Snowflake Computing Inc.

Initial release

2018

2000

2011

1984

2014

Current release

2.3, January 2021

1.23, February 2021

7.9.10.12, February 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free trial version available

commercial

Open Source

BSD

commercial

Limited community edition free

commercial

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

C++

Server operating systems

Linux

Illumos
Linux
OS X
Windows

AIX
HP-UX
Linux
Solaris
Windows

hosted

Data scheme

Schema-free and OWL/RDFS-schema support

yes

schema-free

yes

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

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

.Net
JDBC
ODBC
WebSocket

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
WebDAV

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

C++
Java
Python

Java
Lua
Python
R

C++
Go
Java

3rd party binding
JavaScript (Node.js)

3rd party binding
Python

3rd party binding

.Net
C#
Java
Perl
PHP
Python

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions and aggregates

user defined functions

yes

user defined functions

Triggers

yes

similar concept for controling cloud resources

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Automatic sharding

Sharding

none

yes

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication in MPP-Cluster

none

Source-replica replication

yes

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Kerberos/HDFS data loading

yes

Hadoop integration

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

with automatic compression on writes

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

Access rights for users, groups and roles according to SQL-standard

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

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

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.