DBMS > AnzoGraph DB vs. LevelDB vs. Lovefield vs. SQLite

System Properties Comparison AnzoGraph DB vs. LevelDB vs. Lovefield vs. SQLite

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

Embeddable fast key-value storage library that provides an ordered mapping from string keys to string values

Embeddable relational database for web apps written in pure JavaScript

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
RDF store

Key-value store

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	2.35
Rank	#111	Overall
	#19	Key-value stores

Score	0.29
Rank	#293	Overall
	#133	Relational DBMS

Score	114.32
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Website

cambridgesemantics.com/anzograph

github.com/google/leveldb

google.github.io/lovefield

www.sqlite.org

Technical documentation

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

github.com/google/leveldb/blob/main/doc/index.md

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

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

Developer

Cambridge Semantics

Google

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Initial release

2018

2011

2014

2000

Current release

2.3, January 2021

1.23, February 2021

2.1.12, February 2017

3.45.3 (15 April 2024), April 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free trial version available

Open Source

BSD

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

Public Domain

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++

JavaScript

Server operating systems

Linux

Illumos
Linux
OS X
Windows

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

tested with Chrome, Firefox, IE, Safari

server-less

Data scheme

Schema-free and OWL/RDFS-schema support

schema-free

yes

dynamic column types

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

not rigid because of 'dynamic typing' concept.

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 query language

via JavaScript builder pattern

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

APIs and other access methods

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

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

Supported programming languages

C++
Java
Python

C++
Go
Java

3rd party binding
JavaScript (Node.js)

3rd party binding
Python

3rd party binding

JavaScript

Actionscript
Ada
Basic
C
C#
C++
D
Delphi
Forth
Fortran
Haskell
Java
JavaScript
Lisp
Lua
MatLab
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
PL/SQL
Python
R
Ruby
Scala
Scheme
Smalltalk
Tcl

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions and aggregates

Triggers

Using read-only observers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Automatic sharding

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication in MPP-Cluster

none

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

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

via file-system locks

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

with automatic compression on writes

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

using MemoryDB

yes

User concepts

Access control

Access rights for users and 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.