DBMS > AnzoGraph DB vs. Google Cloud Bigtable vs. mSQL vs. STSdb

System Properties Comparison AnzoGraph DB vs. Google Cloud Bigtable vs. mSQL vs. STSdb

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

Google's NoSQL Big Data database service. It's the same database that powers many core Google services, including Search, Analytics, Maps, and Gmail.

mSQL (Mini SQL) is a simple and lightweight RDBMS

Key-Value Store with special method for indexing

optimized for high performance using a special indexing method

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
RDF store

Key-value store
Wide column 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	3.15
Rank	#95	Overall
	#14	Key-value stores
	#8	Wide column stores

Score	1.27
Rank	#169	Overall
	#76	Relational DBMS

Score	0.10
Rank	#357	Overall
	#51	Key-value stores

Website

cambridgesemantics.com/anzograph

cloud.google.com/bigtable

hughestech.com.au/products/msql

github.com/STSSoft/STSdb4

Technical documentation

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

cloud.google.com/bigtable/docs

Developer

Cambridge Semantics

Google

Hughes Technologies

STS Soft SC

Initial release

2018

2015

1994

2011

Current release

2.3, January 2021

4.4, October 2021

4.0.8, September 2015

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free trial version available

commercial

free licenses can be provided

Open Source

GPLv2, commercial license available

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

Server operating systems

Linux

hosted

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

Windows

Data scheme

Schema-free and OWL/RDFS-schema support

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

primitive types and user defined types (classes)

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.

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

gRPC (using protocol buffers) API
HappyBase (Python library)
HBase compatible API (Java)

JDBC
ODBC

.NET Client API

Supported programming languages

C++
Java
Python

C#
C++
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

C
C++
Delphi
Java
Perl
PHP
Tcl

C#
Java

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions and aggregates

Triggers

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

Internal replication in Colossus, and regional replication between two clusters in different zones

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

Immediate consistency (for a single cluster), Eventual consistency (for two or more replicated clusters)

none

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

not needed in graphs

Transaction concepts

Support to ensure data integrity after non-atomic manipulations of data

ACID

Atomic single-row operations

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

Access rights for users, groups and roles based on Google Cloud Identity and Access Management (IAM)

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

Google Introduces Autoscaling for Cloud Bigtable for Optimizing Costs
31 January 2022, InfoQ.com

Google scales up Cloud Bigtable NoSQL database
27 January 2022, TechTarget

Review: Google Bigtable scales with ease
7 September 2016, InfoWorld

Google Cloud makes it cheaper to run smaller workloads on Bigtable
7 April 2020, TechCrunch

Google introduces Cloud Bigtable managed NoSQL database to process data at scale
6 May 2015, VentureBeat

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