DBMS > AnzoGraph DB vs. LevelDB vs. MySQL vs. Teradata

System Properties Comparison AnzoGraph DB vs. LevelDB vs. MySQL vs. Teradata

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

Widely used open source RDBMS

A hybrid cloud data analytics software platform (Teradata Vantage)

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
RDF store

Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Key/Value like access via memcached API

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Spatial DBMS

Document store
Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS
Time Series 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	1083.74
Rank	#2	Overall
	#2	Relational DBMS

Score	45.33
Rank	#21	Overall
	#15	Relational DBMS

Website

cambridgesemantics.com/anzograph

github.com/google/leveldb

www.mysql.com

www.teradata.com

Technical documentation

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

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

dev.mysql.com/doc

docs.teradata.com

Developer

Cambridge Semantics

Google

Oracle

since 2010, originally MySQL AB, then Sun

Teradata

Initial release

2018

2011

1995

1984

Current release

2.3, January 2021

1.23, February 2021

8.4.0, April 2024

Teradata Vantage 1.0 MU2, January 2019

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free trial version available

Open Source

BSD

Open Source

GPL version 2. Commercial licenses with extended functionallity are available

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.

Aiven for MySQL: Fully managed MySQL, deployable in the cloud of your choice, with seamless integrations and lightning-fast setup.

Implementation language

C++

C and C++

Server operating systems

Linux

Illumos
Linux
OS X
Windows

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

hosted
Linux

Data scheme

Schema-free and OWL/RDFS-schema support

schema-free

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.

yes

Secondary indexes

yes

Join-index to prejoin tables, aggregate index, sparse index, hash index

SQL

Support of SQL

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

yes

with proprietary extensions

yes

SQL 2016 + extensions

APIs and other access methods

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

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
Proprietary native API

.NET Client API
HTTP REST
JDBC
JMS Adapter
ODBC
OLE DB

Supported programming languages

C++
Java
Python

C++
Go
Java

3rd party binding
JavaScript (Node.js)

3rd party binding
Python

3rd party binding

Ada
C
C#
C++
D
Delphi
Eiffel
Erlang
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scheme
Tcl

C
C++
Cobol
Java (JDBC-ODBC)
Perl
PL/1
Python
R
Ruby

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions and aggregates

yes

proprietary syntax

yes

UDFs, stored procedures, table functions in parallel

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Automatic sharding

none

horizontal partitioning, sharding with MySQL Cluster or MySQL Fabric

Sharding

Hashing

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication in MPP-Cluster

none

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

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

not for MyISAM storage engine

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

not for MyISAM storage engine

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

table locks or row locks depending on storage engine

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

with automatic compression on writes

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

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

no user groups or roles

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

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.