DBMS > AnzoGraph DB vs. HarperDB vs. RocksDB vs. searchxml

System Properties Comparison AnzoGraph DB vs. HarperDB vs. RocksDB vs. searchxml

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

Ultra-low latency distributed database with an intuitive REST API supporting NoSQL and SQL (including joins). Deployment of functions and databases simultaneously with a consolidated node-level architecture.

Embeddable persistent key-value store optimized for fast storage (flash and RAM)

DBMS for structured and unstructured content wrapped with an application server

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
RDF store

Document store

Key-value store

Native XML DBMS
Search engine

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	0.55
Rank	#248	Overall
	#38	Document stores

Score	3.65
Rank	#85	Overall
	#11	Key-value stores

Score	0.00
Rank	#383	Overall
	#7	Native XML DBMS
	#25	Search engines

Website

cambridgesemantics.com/anzograph

www.harperdb.io

rocksdb.org

www.searchxml.net/category/products

Technical documentation

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

docs.harperdb.io/docs

github.com/facebook/rocksdb/wiki

www.searchxml.net/support/handouts

Developer

Cambridge Semantics

HarperDB

Facebook, Inc.

informationpartners gmbh

Initial release

2018

2017

2013

2015

Current release

2.3, January 2021

3.1, August 2021

9.2.1, May 2024

1.0

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free trial version available

commercial

free community edition available

Open Source

BSD

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

Node.js

C++

Server operating systems

Linux

Linux
OS X

Linux

Windows

Data scheme

Schema-free and OWL/RDFS-schema support

dynamic schema

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

JSON data types

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 data manipulation statements

APIs and other access methods

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

JDBC
ODBC
React Hooks
RESTful HTTP/JSON API
WebSocket

C++ API
Java API

RESTful HTTP API
WebDAV
XQuery
XSLT

Supported programming languages

C++
Java
Python

.Net
C
C#
C++
ColdFusion
D
Dart
Delphi
Erlang
Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Lisp
MatLab
Objective C
Perl
PHP
PowerShell
Prolog
Python
R
Ruby
Rust
Scala
Swift

C
C++
Go
Java
Perl
Python
Ruby

C++

most other programming languages supported via APIs

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions and aggregates

Custom Functions

since release 3.1

yes

on the application server

Triggers

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Automatic sharding

A table resides as a whole on one (or more) nodes in a cluster

horizontal partitioning

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication in MPP-Cluster

yes

the nodes on which a table resides can be defined

yes

sychronisation to multiple collections

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

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Atomic execution of specific operations

yes

multiple readers, single writer

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

yes, using LMDB

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

Domain, group and role-based access control at the document level and for application services

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.