DBMS > AnzoGraph DB vs. FatDB vs. MaxDB vs. MonetDB vs. Snowflake

System Properties Comparison AnzoGraph DB vs. FatDB vs. MaxDB vs. MonetDB vs. Snowflake

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.

A robust and reliable RDBMS optimized to run all major SAP solutions

A relational database management system that stores data in columns

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

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
RDF store

Document store
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
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	2.32
Rank	#112	Overall
	#55	Relational DBMS

Score	1.72
Rank	#145	Overall
	#67	Relational DBMS

Score	121.33
Rank	#9	Overall
	#6	Relational DBMS

Website

cambridgesemantics.com/anzograph

maxdb.sap.com

www.monetdb.org

www.snowflake.com

Technical documentation

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

maxdb.sap.com/documentation

www.monetdb.org/Documentation

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

Developer

Cambridge Semantics

FatCloud

SAP, acquired from Software AG (Adabas-D) in 1997

MonetDB BV

Snowflake Computing Inc.

Initial release

2018

2012

1984

2004

2014

Current release

2.3, January 2021

7.9.10.12, February 2024

Dec2023 (11.49), December 2023

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free trial version available

commercial

Limited community edition free

Open Source

Mozilla Public License 2.0

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

C++

Server operating systems

Linux

Windows

AIX
HP-UX
Linux
Solaris
Windows

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

hosted

Data scheme

Schema-free and OWL/RDFS-schema support

schema-free

yes

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

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.

Via inetgration in SQL Server

yes

SQL 2003 with some extensions

yes

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

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
WebDAV

JDBC
native C library

MAPI library (MonetDB application programming interface)
ODBC

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

C++
Java
Python

.Net
C#
Java
Perl
PHP
Python

C
C++
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Perl
PHP
Python
R
Ruby

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions and aggregates

yes

via applications

yes

yes, in SQL, C, R

user defined functions

Triggers

yes

via applications

yes

similar concept for controling cloud resources

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Automatic sharding

Sharding

none

Sharding via remote tables

yes

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication in MPP-Cluster

selectable replication factor

Source-replica replication

none

Source-replica replication available in experimental status

yes

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

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

not needed in graphs

yes

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

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

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

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.