DBMS > AnzoGraph DB vs. GBase vs. Infobright vs. LMDB

System Properties Comparison AnzoGraph DB vs. GBase vs. Infobright vs. LMDB

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

Widely used RDBMS in China, including analytical, transactional, distributed transactional, and cloud-native data warehousing.

High performant column-oriented DBMS for analytic workloads using MySQL or PostgreSQL as a frontend

A high performant, light-weight, embedded key-value database library

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
RDF store

Relational DBMS

Key-value store

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	1.05
Rank	#186	Overall
	#86	Relational DBMS

Score	1.02
Rank	#192	Overall
	#90	Relational DBMS

Score	2.09
Rank	#121	Overall
	#20	Key-value stores

Website

cambridgesemantics.com/anzograph

www.gbase.cn

ignitetech.com/softwarelibrary/infobrightdb

www.symas.com/symas-embedded-database-lmdb

Technical documentation

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

www.lmdb.tech/doc

Developer

Cambridge Semantics

General Data Technology Co., Ltd.

Ignite Technologies Inc.; formerly InfoBright Inc.

Symas

Initial release

2018

2004

2005

2011

Current release

2.3, January 2021

GBase 8a, GBase 8s, GBase 8c

0.9.32, January 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free trial version available

commercial

The open source (GPLv2) version did not support inserts/updates/deletes and was discontinued with July 2016

Open Source

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, Python

Server operating systems

Linux

Linux
Windows

Linux
Unix
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.

yes

Secondary indexes

yes

Knowledge Grid Technology used instead

SQL

Support of SQL

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

Standard with numerous extensions

yes

APIs and other access methods

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

ADO.NET
C API
JDBC
ODBC

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

C++
Java
Python

.Net
C
C#
C++
D
Eiffel
Erlang
Haskell
Java
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scheme
Tcl

.Net
C
C++
Clojure
Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Lisp
Lua
MatLab
Nim
Objective C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Rust
Swift
Tcl

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions and aggregates

user defined functions

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Automatic sharding

horizontal partitioning (by range, list and hash) and vertical partitioning

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication in MPP-Cluster

yes

Source-replica replication

none

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

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

yes

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

exploiting MySQL or PostgreSQL frontend capabilities

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

Automating SAP S/4HANA Migration with IT-Conductor, BGP Managed Services, and AWS | Amazon Web Services
22 August 2023, AWS Blog

The Tom Brady Data Biography
8 September 2023, StatsBomb

The Lightning Memory-mapped Database
2 March 2016, InfoQ.com

Akamai launches managed database service – Blocks and Files
25 April 2022, Blocks and Files

HarperDB - How and Why We Built It From The Ground Up on NodeJS
28 February 2021, hackernoon.com

provided by Google News

Share this page