DBMS > AnzoGraph DB vs. Google Cloud Datastore vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. MySQL

System Properties Comparison AnzoGraph DB vs. Google Cloud Datastore vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. MySQL

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

Automatically scaling NoSQL Database as a Service (DBaaS) on the Google Cloud Platform

A Wide Column Store for rapid development using massive semi-structured datasets

Widely used open source RDBMS

Primary database model

Key/Value like access via memcached API

Secondary database models

Document store
Spatial 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	4.36
Rank	#72	Overall
	#12	Document stores

Score	4.04
Rank	#77	Overall
	#6	Wide column stores

Score	1061.34
Rank	#2	Overall
	#2	Relational DBMS

Website

cambridgesemantics.com/anzograph

cloud.google.com/datastore

azure.microsoft.com/en-us/services/storage/tables

www.mysql.com

Technical documentation

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

cloud.google.com/datastore/docs

dev.mysql.com/doc

Developer

Cambridge Semantics

Google

Microsoft

Oracle

since 2010, originally MySQL AB, then Sun

Initial release

2018

2008

2012

1995

Current release

2.3, January 2021

8.4.0, April 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free trial version available

commercial

Open Source

GPL version 2. Commercial licenses with extended functionallity are 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.

Aiven for MySQL: Fully managed MySQL, deployable in the cloud of your choice, with seamless integrations and lightning-fast setup.

Implementation language

C and C++

Server operating systems

Linux

hosted

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

Data scheme

Schema-free and OWL/RDFS-schema support

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes, details here

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.

SQL-like query language (GQL)

yes

with proprietary extensions

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
RESTful HTTP/JSON API

RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
Proprietary native API

Supported programming languages

C++
Java
Python

.Net
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
Ruby

.Net
C#
C++
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
Ruby

Ada
C
C#
C++
D
Delphi
Eiffel
Erlang
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scheme
Tcl

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions and aggregates

using Google App Engine

yes

proprietary syntax

Triggers

Callbacks using the Google Apps Engine

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Automatic sharding

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

horizontal partitioning, sharding with MySQL Cluster or MySQL Fabric

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication in MPP-Cluster

Multi-source replication using Paxos

yes

implicit feature of the cloud service. Replication either local, cross-facility or geo-redundant.

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Kerberos/HDFS data loading

yes

using Google Cloud Dataflow

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency in MPP-Cluster

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on type of query and configuration

Strong Consistency is default for entity lookups and queries within an Entity Group (but can instead be made eventually consistent). Other queries are always eventual consistent.

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

not needed in graphs

yes

via ReferenceProperties or Ancestor paths

yes

not for MyISAM storage engine

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Serializable Isolation within Transactions, Read Committed outside of Transactions

optimistic locking

ACID

not for MyISAM storage engine

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

table locks or row locks depending on storage engine

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)

Access rights based on private key authentication or shared access signatures

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

no user groups or roles

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.