DBMS > AnzoGraph DB vs. IBM Db2 Event Store vs. JanusGraph vs. Netezza vs. Snowflake

System Properties Comparison AnzoGraph DB vs. IBM Db2 Event Store vs. JanusGraph vs. Netezza vs. Snowflake

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

Distributed Event Store optimized for Internet of Things use cases

A Graph DBMS optimized for distributed clusters

It was forked from the latest code base of Titan in January 2017

Data warehouse and analytics appliance part of IBM PureSystems

Cloud-based data warehousing service for structured and semi-structured data

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
RDF store

Event Store
Time Series DBMS

Graph DBMS

Relational DBMS

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	0.19
Rank	#323	Overall
	#2	Event Stores
	#28	Time Series DBMS

Score	1.94
Rank	#129	Overall
	#12	Graph DBMS

Score	9.06
Rank	#46	Overall
	#29	Relational DBMS

Score	121.33
Rank	#9	Overall
	#6	Relational DBMS

Website

cambridgesemantics.com/anzograph

www.ibm.com/products/db2-event-store

janusgraph.org

www.ibm.com/products/netezza

www.snowflake.com

Technical documentation

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

www.ibm.com/docs/en/db2-event-store

docs.janusgraph.org

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

Developer

Cambridge Semantics

IBM

Linux Foundation; originally developed as Titan by Aurelius

IBM

Snowflake Computing Inc.

Initial release

2018

2017

2000

2014

Current release

2.3, January 2021

2.0

0.6.3, February 2023

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free trial version available

commercial

free developer edition available

Open Source

Apache 2.0

commercial

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

C and C++

Java

Server operating systems

Linux

Linux, macOS, Windows for the developer addition

Linux
OS X
Unix
Windows

Linux

included in appliance

hosted

Data scheme

Schema-free and OWL/RDFS-schema support

yes

support of semi-structured data formats (JSON, XML, Avro)

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

through the embedded Spark runtime

yes

APIs and other access methods

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

ADO.NET
DB2 Connect
JDBC
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

Java API
TinkerPop Blueprints
TinkerPop Frames
TinkerPop Gremlin
TinkerPop Rexster

JDBC
ODBC
OLE DB

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

C++
Java
Python

C
C#
C++
Cobol
Delphi
Fortran
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Perl
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Scala
Visual Basic

Clojure
Java
Python

C
C++
Fortran
Java
Lua
Perl
Python
R

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions and aggregates

yes

user defined functions

Triggers

yes

similar concept for controling cloud resources

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Automatic sharding

Sharding

yes

depending on the used storage backend (e.g. Cassandra, HBase, BerkeleyDB)

Sharding

yes

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication in MPP-Cluster

Active-active shard replication

yes

Source-replica replication

yes

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Kerberos/HDFS data loading

yes

via Faunus, a graph analytics engine

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency in MPP-Cluster

Eventual Consistency

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

not needed in graphs

yes

Relationships 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

No - written data is immutable

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

Yes - Synchronous writes to local disk combined with replication and asynchronous writes in parquet format to permanent shared storage

yes

Supports various storage backends: Cassandra, HBase, Berkeley DB, Akiban, Hazelcast

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

User authentification and security via Rexster Graph Server

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

Users with fine-grained authorization concept, user roles and pluggable authentication

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.