DBMS > AnzoGraph DB vs. mSQL vs. OrigoDB vs. SiteWhere vs. SWC-DB

System Properties Comparison AnzoGraph DB vs. mSQL vs. OrigoDB vs. SiteWhere vs. SWC-DB

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

mSQL (Mini SQL) is a simple and lightweight RDBMS

A fully ACID in-memory object graph database

M2M integration platform for persisting/querying time series data

A high performance, scalable Wide Column DBMS

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
RDF store

Relational DBMS

Document store
Object oriented DBMS

Time Series DBMS

Wide column store

Secondary database models

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	1.27
Rank	#167	Overall
	#77	Relational DBMS

Score	0.00
Rank	#383	Overall
	#53	Document stores
	#20	Object oriented DBMS

Score	0.06
Rank	#356	Overall
	#35	Time Series DBMS

Score	0.01
Rank	#376	Overall
	#13	Wide column stores

Website

cambridgesemantics.com/anzograph

hughestech.com.au/products/msql

origodb.com

github.com/sitewhere/sitewhere

github.com/kashirin-alex/swc-db
www.swcdb.org

Technical documentation

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

origodb.com/docs

sitewhere1.sitewhere.io/index.html

Developer

Cambridge Semantics

Hughes Technologies

Robert Friberg et al

SiteWhere

Alex Kashirin

Initial release

2018

1994

2009

under the name LiveDB

2010

2020

Current release

2.3, January 2021

4.4, October 2021

0.5, April 2021

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free trial version available

commercial

free licenses can be provided

Open Source

Common Public Attribution License Version 1.0

Open Source

GPL V3

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

Java

C++

Server operating systems

Linux

AIX
HP-UX
Linux
OS X
Solaris SPARC/x86
Windows

Linux
Windows

Linux
OS X
Windows

Linux

Data scheme

Schema-free and OWL/RDFS-schema support

yes

predefined scheme

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

User defined using .NET types and collections

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.

can be achieved using .NET

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

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

A subset of ANSI SQL is implemented

no subqueries, aggregate functions, views, foreign keys, triggers

SQL-like query language

APIs and other access methods

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

JDBC
ODBC

.NET Client API
HTTP API
LINQ

HTTP REST

Proprietary protocol
Thrift

Supported programming languages

C++
Java
Python

C
C++
Delphi
Java
Perl
PHP
Tcl

.Net

C++

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions and aggregates

yes

Triggers

yes

Domain Events

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Automatic sharding

none

horizontal partitioning

client side managed; servers are not synchronized

Sharding

based on HBase

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication in MPP-Cluster

none

Source-replica replication

selectable replication factor

based on HBase

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

none

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

not needed in graphs

depending on model

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

Write ahead log

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

Role based authorization

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

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.

Related products and services

We invite representatives of vendors of related products to contact us for presenting information about their offerings here.

More resources

Recent citations in the news

AnzoGraph review: A graph database for deep analytics
15 April 2019, InfoWorld

Cambridge Semantics Fits AnzoGraph DB with More Speed, Free Access
23 January 2020, Solutions Review

AnzoGraph: A W3C Standards-Based Graph Database | by Jo Stichbury
8 February 2019, Towards Data Science

Back to the future: Does graph database success hang on query language?
5 March 2018, ZDNet

Is The Enterprise Knowledge Graph Finally Going To Make All Data Usable?
19 September 2018, Forbes

provided by Google News

Higher Education PS rules out ghost students before PAC
29 November 2018, diggers.news

provided by Google News

SiteWhere: An open platform for connected devices
11 July 2017, Open Source For You

Ten Popular IoT Platforms You Should be Aware of
27 March 2023, Open Source For You

11 Best Open source IoT Platforms To Develop Smart Projects
9 March 2023, H2S Media

provided by Google News

2022 All O-Zone Football Team
17 December 2022, Ozarks Sports Zone

provided by Google News

Share this page