DBMS > AnzoGraph DB vs. FileMaker vs. Sadas Engine vs. TimesTen

System Properties Comparison AnzoGraph DB vs. FileMaker vs. Sadas Engine vs. TimesTen

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

FileMaker is a cross-platform RDBMS that includes a GUI frontend.

SADAS Engine is a columnar DBMS specifically designed for high performance in data warehouse environments

In-Memory RDBMS compatible to Oracle

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
RDF store

Relational 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	48.20
Rank	#20	Overall
	#14	Relational DBMS

Score	0.00
Rank	#383	Overall
	#158	Relational DBMS

Score	1.31
Rank	#163	Overall
	#74	Relational DBMS

Website

cambridgesemantics.com/anzograph

www.claris.com/filemaker

www.sadasengine.com

www.oracle.com/database/technologies/related/timesten.html

Technical documentation

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

www.claris.com/resources/documentation

www.sadasengine.com/en/sadas-engine-download-free-trial-and-documentation/#documentation

docs.oracle.com/database/timesten-18.1

Developer

Cambridge Semantics

Claris

a subsidiary of Apple

SADAS s.r.l.

Oracle, TimesTen Performance Software, HP

originally founded in HP Labs it was acquired by Oracle in 2005

Initial release

2018

1983

2006

1998

Current release

2.3, January 2021

19.4.1, November 2021

8.0

11 Release 2 (11.2.2.8.0)

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free trial version available

commercial

free trial version available

commercial

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

iOS

client part only
Linux
OS X
Windows

AIX
Linux
Windows

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

Data scheme

Schema-free and OWL/RDFS-schema support

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

A http query request can return the data in XML format

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

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

yes

via plugins

yes

APIs and other access methods

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

Filemaker WebDirect
JDBC
ODBC

JDBC
ODBC
Proprietary protocol

JDBC
ODBC
ODP.NET
Oracle Call Interface (OCI)

Supported programming languages

C++
Java
Python

PHP

.Net
C
C#
C++
Groovy
Java
PHP
Python

C
C++
Java
PL/SQL

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions and aggregates

yes

PL/SQL

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Automatic sharding

none

horizontal partitioning

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication in MPP-Cluster

Source-replica replication, warm standby

since Version 14

none

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Kerberos/HDFS data loading

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency in MPP-Cluster

Immediate Consistency

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration

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

by means of logfiles and checkpoints

In-memory capabilities

Is there an option to define some or all structures to be held in-memory only.

yes

managed by 'Learn by Usage'

yes

User concepts

Access control

Access rights for users and roles

simple rights management via user accounts and connection to external directory services

Access rights for users, groups and roles according to SQL-standard

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

Recent citations in the news

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

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

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

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

Is The Enterprise Knowledge Graph Finally Going To Make All Data Usable?
19 September 2018, Forbes

provided by Google News

Reviews - Features
1 March 2024, Reverse Shot

Free FileMaker open-source basic ERP revolutionizes company management
15 May 2024, openPR

Tilda Swinton on 'Problemista' Fan Horror Stories About Her Character
1 March 2024, IndieWire

Apple Filed for new Trademarks in the U.S. and Hong Kong this week for the Figurative Version of 'Reality Composer ...
15 October 2023, Patently Apple

Claris FileMaker Pro 19 review
2 March 2022, TechRadar

provided by Google News

Oracle starts peddling Exalytics in-memory appliance
12 March 2012, The Register

provided by Google News

Share this page