DBMS > AnzoGraph DB vs. FatDB vs. Graphite vs. Postgres-XL

System Properties Comparison AnzoGraph DB vs. FatDB vs. Graphite vs. Postgres-XL

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

FatDB/FatCloud has ceased operations as a company with February 2014. FatDB is discontinued and excluded from the ranking.

Description

Scalable graph database built for online analytics and data harmonization with MPP scaling, high-performance analytical algorithms and reasoning, and virtualization

A .NET NoSQL DBMS that can integrate with and extend SQL Server.

Data logging and graphing tool for time series data

The storage layer (fixed size database) is called Whisper

Based on PostgreSQL enhanced with MPP and write-scale-out cluster features

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
RDF store

Document store
Key-value store

Time Series DBMS

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Spatial 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	4.83
Rank	#67	Overall
	#4	Time Series DBMS

Score	0.53
Rank	#254	Overall
	#117	Relational DBMS

Website

cambridgesemantics.com/anzograph

github.com/graphite-project/graphite-web

www.postgres-xl.org

Technical documentation

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

graphite.readthedocs.io

www.postgres-xl.org/documentation

Developer

Cambridge Semantics

FatCloud

Chris Davis

Initial release

2018

2012

2006

2014

since 2012, originally named StormDB

Current release

2.3, January 2021

10 R1, October 2018

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free trial version available

commercial

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

Mozilla public license

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

Python

Server operating systems

Linux

Windows

Linux
Unix

Linux
macOS

Data scheme

Schema-free and OWL/RDFS-schema support

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

Numeric data only

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

XML type, but no XML query functionality

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

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

Via inetgration in SQL Server

yes

distributed, parallel query execution

APIs and other access methods

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

.NET Client API
LINQ
RESTful HTTP API
RPC
Windows WCF Bindings

HTTP API
Sockets

ADO.NET
JDBC
native C library
ODBC
streaming API for large objects

Supported programming languages

C++
Java
Python

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

.Net
C
C++
Delphi
Erlang
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Perl
PHP
Python
Tcl

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions and aggregates

yes

via applications

user defined functions

Triggers

yes

via applications

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Automatic sharding

Sharding

none

horizontal partitioning

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication in MPP-Cluster

selectable replication factor

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

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

none

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

MVCC

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

locking

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

Can implement custom security layer via applications

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

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

DB-Engines blog posts

Time Series DBMS are the database category with the fastest increase in popularity
4 July 2016, Matthias Gelbmann

Time Series DBMS as a new trend?
1 June 2015, Paul Andlinger

show all

Recent citations in the news

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

Cambridge Semantics Unveils AnzoGraph DB with Geospatial Analytics
19 June 2020, Solutions Review

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

provided by Google News

Try out the Graphite monitoring tool for time-series data
29 October 2019, TechTarget

Getting Started with Monitoring using Graphite
23 January 2015, InfoQ.com

The Billion Data Point Challenge: Building a Query Engine for High Cardinality Time Series Data
10 December 2018, Uber

The value of time series data and TSDBs
10 June 2021, InfoWorld

Real-Time Performance and Health Monitoring Using Netdata
2 September 2019, CNX Software

provided by Google News

Share this page