DBMS > AnzoGraph DB vs. EsgynDB vs. mSQL vs. RavenDB

System Properties Comparison AnzoGraph DB vs. EsgynDB vs. mSQL vs. RavenDB

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

Enterprise-class SQL-on-Hadoop solution, powered by Apache Trafodion

mSQL (Mini SQL) is a simple and lightweight RDBMS

Open Source Operational and Transactional Enterprise NoSQL Document Database

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
RDF store

Relational DBMS

Document store

Secondary database models

Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS
Time Series DBMS

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

Score	0.29
Rank	#303	Overall
	#25	Graph DBMS
	#14	RDF stores

Score	0.25
Rank	#312	Overall
	#138	Relational DBMS

Score	1.27
Rank	#169	Overall
	#76	Relational DBMS

Score	2.84
Rank	#101	Overall
	#18	Document stores

Website

cambridgesemantics.com/anzograph

www.esgyn.cn

hughestech.com.au/products/msql

ravendb.net

Technical documentation

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

ravendb.net/docs

Developer

Cambridge Semantics

Esgyn

Hughes Technologies

Hibernating Rhinos

Initial release

2018

2015

1994

2010

Current release

2.3, January 2021

4.4, October 2021

5.4, July 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free trial version available

commercial

free licenses can be provided

Open Source

AGPL version 3, commercial license available

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++, Java

Server operating systems

Linux

AIX
HP-UX
Linux
OS X
Solaris SPARC/x86
Windows

Linux
macOS
Raspberry Pi
Windows

Data scheme

Schema-free and OWL/RDFS-schema support

yes

schema-free

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

SQL

Support of SQL

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

yes

A subset of ANSI SQL is implemented

no subqueries, aggregate functions, views, foreign keys, triggers

SQL-like query language (RQL)

APIs and other access methods

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

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

JDBC
ODBC

.NET Client API
F# Client API
Go Client API
Java Client API
NodeJS Client API
PHP Client API
Python Client API
RESTful HTTP API

Supported programming languages

C++
Java
Python

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC/ADO.Net

C
C++
Delphi
Java
Perl
PHP
Tcl

.Net
C#
F#
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
Ruby

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions and aggregates

Java Stored Procedures

yes

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Automatic sharding

Sharding

none

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication in MPP-Cluster

Multi-source replication between multi datacenters

none

Multi-source replication

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

none

Default ACID transactions on the local node (eventually consistent across the cluster). Atomic operations with cluster-wide ACID transactions. Eventual consistency for indexes and full-text search indexes.

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

not needed in graphs

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

ACID, Cluster-wide transaction available

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

User concepts

Access control

Access rights for users and roles

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Authorization levels configured per client per database

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.

Related products and services

We invite representatives of vendors of related products to contact us for presenting information about their offerings here.

More resources

Recent citations in the news

AnzoGraph review: A graph database for deep analytics
15 April 2019, InfoWorld

AnzoGraph: A W3C Standards-Based Graph Database | by Jo Stichbury
8 February 2019, Towards Data Science

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

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

Comparing Graph Databases II. Part 2: ArangoDB, OrientDB, and… | by Sam Bell
20 September 2019, Towards Data Science

provided by Google News

Higher Education PS rules out ghost students before PAC
29 November 2018, diggers.news

provided by Google News

RavenDB Launches Version 6.0 Lightning Fast Queries, Data Integrations, Corax Indexing Engine, and Sharding
3 October 2023, PR Newswire

Install the NoSQL RavenDB Data System
14 May 2021, The New Stack

RavenDB Adds Graph Queries
15 May 2019, Datanami

Review: NoSQL database RavenDB
20 March 2019, TechGenix

RavenDB Welcomes David Baruc as Chief Revenue Officer: Seasoned Tech Leader to Drive Global Sales and ...
13 June 2023, PR Newswire

provided by Google News

Share this page