DBMS > AnzoGraph DB vs. HEAVY.AI vs. mSQL vs. OpenQM

System Properties Comparison AnzoGraph DB vs. HEAVY.AI vs. mSQL vs. OpenQM

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

A high performance, column-oriented RDBMS, specifically developed to harness the massive parallelism of modern CPU and GPU hardware

mSQL (Mini SQL) is a simple and lightweight RDBMS

QpenQM is a high-performance, self-tuning, multi-value DBMS

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
RDF store

Relational DBMS

Multivalue DBMS

Secondary database models

Spatial DBMS

DB-Engines Ranking measures the popularity of database management systems
Trend Chart

Score	0.27
Rank	#302	Overall
	#24	Graph DBMS
	#13	RDF stores

Score	2.10
Rank	#126	Overall
	#61	Relational DBMS

Score	1.67
Rank	#151	Overall
	#70	Relational DBMS

Score	0.33
Rank	#286	Overall
	#10	Multivalue DBMS

Website

cambridgesemantics.com/anzograph

github.com/heavyai/heavydb
www.heavy.ai

hughestech.com.au/products/msql

www.rocketsoftware.com/products/rocket-multivalue-application-development-platform/rocket-open-qm

Technical documentation

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

docs.heavy.ai

Developer

Cambridge Semantics

HEAVY.AI, Inc.

Hughes Technologies

Rocket Software, originally Martin Phillips

Initial release

2018

2016

1994

1993

Current release

2.3, January 2021

5.10, January 2022

4.4, October 2021

3.4-12

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free trial version available

Open Source

Apache Version 2; enterprise edition available

commercial

free licenses can be provided

Open Source

GPLv2, extended commercial license available

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++ and CUDA

Server operating systems

Linux

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

AIX
FreeBSD
Linux
macOS
Raspberry Pi
Solaris
Windows

Data scheme

Schema-free and OWL/RDFS-schema support

yes

with some exceptions

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.

yes

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

JDBC
ODBC
Thrift
Vega

JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

C++
Java
Python

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC/Thrift
Python

C
C++
Delphi
Java
Perl
PHP
Tcl

.Net
Basic
C
Java
Objective C
PHP
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions and aggregates

yes

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Automatic sharding

Sharding

Round robin

none

yes

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication in MPP-Cluster

Multi-source replication

none

yes

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

none

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

not needed in graphs

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

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Access rights can be defined down to the item level

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

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

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

provided by Google News

Big Data Analytics: A Game Changer for Infrastructure
13 July 2023, Spiceworks News and Insights

HEAVY.AI Launches HEAVY 7.0, Introducing Real-Time Machine Learning Capabilities
19 April 2023, Business Wire

Making the most of geospatial intelligence
14 April 2023, InfoWorld

HEAVY.AI Partners with Bain, Maxar, and Nvidia to Provide Digital Twins for Telecom Networks
16 February 2023, Datanami

The insideBIGDATA IMPACT 50 List for Q4 2023
11 October 2023, insideBIGDATA

provided by Google News

Make Your MySQL Server More Secure With These 7 Steps - MUO
1 December 2022, MakeUseOf

Writing a Web Service in Perl
9 July 2003, PCQuest

Higher Education PS rules out ghost students before PAC - Zambia
29 November 2018, diggers.news

provided by Google News

Share this page