DBMS > AnzoGraph DB vs. Ehcache vs. Netezza vs. Snowflake vs. SpaceTime

System Properties Comparison AnzoGraph DB vs. Ehcache vs. Netezza vs. Snowflake vs. SpaceTime

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

Data warehouse and analytics appliance part of IBM PureSystems

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

SpaceTime is a spatio-temporal DBMS with a focus on performance.

Primary database model

Secondary database models

Relational 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	5.23
Rank	#68	Overall
	#8	Key-value stores

Score	10.18
Rank	#46	Overall
	#29	Relational DBMS

Score	123.20
Rank	#9	Overall
	#6	Relational DBMS

Score	0.00
Rank	#396	Overall
	#8	Spatial DBMS

Website

cambridgesemantics.com/anzograph

www.ehcache.org

www.ibm.com/products/netezza

www.snowflake.com

www.mireo.com/spacetime

Technical documentation

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

www.ehcache.org/documentation

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

Developer

Cambridge Semantics

Terracotta Inc, owned by Software AG

IBM

Snowflake Computing Inc.

Mireo

Initial release

2018

2009

2000

2014

2020

Current release

2.3, January 2021

3.10.0, March 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free trial version available

Open Source

Apache Version 2; commercial licenses available

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

Java

C++

Server operating systems

Linux

All OS with a Java VM

Linux

included in appliance

hosted

Linux

Data scheme

Schema-free and OWL/RDFS-schema support

schema-free

yes

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

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.

yes

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

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

yes

A subset of ANSI SQL is implemented

APIs and other access methods

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

JCache

JDBC
ODBC
OLE DB

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

RESTful HTTP API

Supported programming languages

C++
Java
Python

Java

C
C++
Fortran
Java
Lua
Perl
Python
R

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

C#
C++
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions and aggregates

yes

user defined functions

Triggers

yes

Cache Event Listeners

similar concept for controling cloud resources

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Automatic sharding

Sharding

by using Terracotta Server

Sharding

yes

Fixed-grid hypercubes

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication in MPP-Cluster

yes

by using Terracotta Server

Source-replica replication

yes

Real-time block device replication (DRBD)

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

Tunable Consistency (Strong, Eventual, Weak)

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

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

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

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

yes

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.