DBMS > AnzoGraph DB vs. Ehcache vs. Microsoft SQL Server vs. Stardog

System Properties Comparison AnzoGraph DB vs. Ehcache vs. Microsoft SQL Server vs. Stardog

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

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

A widely adopted Java cache with tiered storage options

Microsofts flagship relational DBMS

Enterprise Knowledge Graph platform and graph DBMS with high availability, high performance reasoning, and virtualization

Primary database model

Secondary database models

Document store
Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS

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	4.89
Rank	#67	Overall
	#8	Key-value stores

Score	824.29
Rank	#3	Overall
	#3	Relational DBMS

Score	2.02
Rank	#123	Overall
	#11	Graph DBMS
	#6	RDF stores

Website

cambridgesemantics.com/anzograph

www.ehcache.org

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

www.stardog.com

Technical documentation

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

www.ehcache.org/documentation

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

docs.stardog.com

Developer

Cambridge Semantics

Terracotta Inc, owned by Software AG

Microsoft

Stardog-Union

Initial release

2018

2009

1989

2010

Current release

2.3, January 2021

3.10.0, March 2022

SQL Server 2022, November 2022

7.3.0, May 2020

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free trial version available

Open Source

Apache Version 2; commercial licenses available

commercial

restricted free version is available

commercial

60-day fully-featured trial license; 1-year fully-featured non-commercial use license for academics/students

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

Java

C++

Java

Server operating systems

Linux

All OS with a Java VM

Linux
Windows

Linux
macOS
Windows

Data scheme

Schema-free and OWL/RDFS-schema support

schema-free

yes

schema-free and OWL/RDFS-schema support

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

Import/export of XML data possible

Secondary indexes

yes

supports real-time indexing in full-text and geospatial

SQL

Support of SQL

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

yes

Yes, compatible with all major SQL variants through dedicated BI/SQL Server

APIs and other access methods

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

JCache

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

GraphQL query language
HTTP API
Jena RDF API
OWL
RDF4J API
Sesame REST HTTP Protocol
SNARL
SPARQL
Spring Data
Stardog Studio
TinkerPop 3

Supported programming languages

C++
Java
Python

Java

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

.Net
Clojure
Groovy
Java
JavaScript
Python
Ruby

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions and aggregates

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

user defined functions and aggregates, HTTP Server extensions in Java

Triggers

yes

Cache Event Listeners

yes

via event handlers

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Automatic sharding

Sharding

by using Terracotta Server

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

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication in MPP-Cluster

yes

by using Terracotta Server

yes, but depending on the SQL-Server Edition

Multi-source replication in HA-Cluster

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

Tunable Consistency (Strong, Eventual, Weak)

Immediate Consistency

Immediate Consistency in HA-Cluster

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

not needed in graphs

yes

relationships in graphs

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

yes

supports JTA and can work as an XA resource

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

using a tiered cache-storage approach

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

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

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.