DBMS > AnzoGraph DB vs. FatDB vs. LevelDB vs. mSQL

System Properties Comparison AnzoGraph DB vs. FatDB vs. LevelDB vs. mSQL

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.

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

mSQL (Mini SQL) is a simple and lightweight RDBMS

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
RDF store

Document store
Key-value store

Key-value store

Relational 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	2.25
Rank	#115	Overall
	#19	Key-value stores

Score	1.27
Rank	#169	Overall
	#76	Relational DBMS

Website

cambridgesemantics.com/anzograph

github.com/google/leveldb

hughestech.com.au/products/msql

Technical documentation

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

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

Developer

Cambridge Semantics

FatCloud

Google

Hughes Technologies

Initial release

2018

2012

2011

1994

Current release

2.3, January 2021

1.23, February 2021

4.4, October 2021

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free trial version available

commercial

Open Source

BSD

commercial

free licenses can be provided

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++

Server operating systems

Linux

Windows

Illumos
Linux
OS X
Windows

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

Data scheme

Schema-free and OWL/RDFS-schema support

schema-free

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.

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

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

Via inetgration in SQL Server

A subset of ANSI SQL is implemented

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

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

JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

C++
Java
Python

C++
Go
Java

3rd party binding
JavaScript (Node.js)

3rd party binding
Python

3rd party binding

C
C++
Delphi
Java
Perl
PHP
Tcl

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions and aggregates

yes

via applications

Triggers

yes

via applications

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Automatic sharding

Sharding

none

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

Immediate Consistency

none

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

not needed in graphs

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

Can implement custom security layer via applications

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

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

Malicious npm 'colors' typosquats pack Discord malware
3 May 2022, Sonatype Blog

Pliops unveils XDP-Rocks for RocksDB – Blocks and Files
19 October 2022, Blocks and Files

Microsoft Teams stores auth tokens as cleartext in Windows, Linux, Macs
14 September 2022, BleepingComputer

XanMod, Liquorix Kernels Offer Some Advantages On AMD Ryzen 5 Notebook
26 July 2021, Phoronix

Threat Thursday: BlackGuard Infostealer Rises from Russian Underground Markets
21 April 2022, BlackBerry Blog

provided by Google News

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

provided by Google News

Share this page