DBMS > AnzoGraph DB vs. Kinetica vs. Lovefield vs. SAP HANA

System Properties Comparison AnzoGraph DB vs. Kinetica vs. Lovefield vs. SAP HANA

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

Fully vectorized database across both GPUs and CPUs

Embeddable relational database for web apps written in pure JavaScript

In-memory, column based data store. Available as appliance or cloud service

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
RDF store

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Spatial DBMS
Time Series DBMS

Document store
Graph DBMS

with SAP Hana, Enterprise Edition
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	0.66
Rank	#234	Overall
	#107	Relational DBMS

Score	0.33
Rank	#286	Overall
	#131	Relational DBMS

Score	44.27
Rank	#23	Overall
	#16	Relational DBMS

Website

cambridgesemantics.com/anzograph

www.kinetica.com

google.github.io/lovefield

www.sap.com/products/hana.html

Technical documentation

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

docs.kinetica.com

github.com/google/lovefield/blob/master/docs/spec_index.md

help.sap.com/hana

Developer

Cambridge Semantics

Kinetica

Google

SAP

Initial release

2018

2012

2014

2010

Current release

2.3, January 2021

7.1, August 2021

2.1.12, February 2017

2.0 SPS07 (April 4, 2023), April 2023

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free trial version available

commercial

Open Source

Apache 2.0

commercial

Cloud-based only

Only available as a cloud service

also available as a cloud based service

DBaaS offerings (sponsored links)

Database as a Service

Providers of DBaaS offerings, please contact us to be listed.

Implementation language

C, C++

JavaScript

Server operating systems

Linux

server-less, requires a JavaScript environment (browser, Node.js)

tested with Chrome, Firefox, IE, Safari

Appliance or cloud-service

Data scheme

Schema-free and OWL/RDFS-schema support

yes

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.

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SPARQL and SPARQL* as primary query language. Cypher preview.

SQL-like DML and DDL statements

SQL-like query language

via JavaScript builder pattern

yes

APIs and other access methods

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

JDBC
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

C++
Java
Python

C++
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

JavaScript

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions and aggregates

user defined functions

SQLScript, R

Triggers

yes

triggers when inserted values for one or more columns fall within a specified range

Using read-only observers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Automatic sharding

Sharding

none

yes

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication in MPP-Cluster

Source-replica 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 or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

not needed 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

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

yes, by using IndexedDB or the cloud service Firebase Realtime Database

yes

In-memory capabilities

Is there an option to define some or all structures to be held in-memory only.

yes

GPU vRAM or System RAM

yes

using MemoryDB

yes

User concepts

Access control

Access rights for users and roles

Access rights for users and roles on table level

yes

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.