DBMS > AnzoGraph DB vs. etcd vs. Postgres-XL vs. VelocityDB

System Properties Comparison AnzoGraph DB vs. etcd vs. Postgres-XL vs. VelocityDB

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

A distributed reliable key-value store

Based on PostgreSQL enhanced with MPP and write-scale-out cluster features

A .NET Object Database that can be embedded/distributed and extended to a graph data model (VelocityGraph)

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
RDF store

Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Graph DBMS
Object oriented DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
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	7.03
Rank	#54	Overall
	#5	Key-value stores

Score	0.53
Rank	#254	Overall
	#117	Relational DBMS

Score	0.11
Rank	#354	Overall
	#37	Graph DBMS
	#15	Object oriented DBMS

Website

cambridgesemantics.com/anzograph

etcd.io
github.com/etcd-io/etcd

www.postgres-xl.org

velocitydb.com

Technical documentation

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

etcd.io/docs
github.com/etcd-io/etcd/tree/master/Documentation

www.postgres-xl.org/documentation

velocitydb.com/UserGuide

Developer

Cambridge Semantics

VelocityDB Inc

Initial release

2018

2014

since 2012, originally named StormDB

2011

Current release

2.3, January 2021

3.4, August 2019

10 R1, October 2018

7.x

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free trial version available

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

Open Source

Mozilla public license

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.

Implementation language

Server operating systems

Linux

FreeBSD
Linux
Windows

experimental

Linux
macOS

Any that supports .NET

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

XML type, but no XML query functionality

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

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

yes

distributed, parallel query execution

APIs and other access methods

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

gRPC
JSON over HTTP

ADO.NET
JDBC
native C library
ODBC
streaming API for large objects

.Net

Supported programming languages

C++
Java
Python

.Net
C
C++
Clojure
Erlang
Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Perl
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Rust
Scala
Tcl

.Net
C
C++
Delphi
Erlang
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Perl
PHP
Python
Tcl

.Net

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions and aggregates

user defined functions

Triggers

yes, watching key changes

yes

Callbacks are triggered when data changes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Automatic sharding

horizontal partitioning

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication in MPP-Cluster

Using Raft consensus algorithm to ensure data replication with strong consistency among multiple replicas.

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

MVCC

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

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

Based on Windows 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.

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

Monitor Amazon EKS Control Plane metrics using AWS Open Source monitoring services | Amazon Web Services
12 October 2023, AWS Blog

Apache APISIX Without etcd?
27 July 2023, hackernoon.com

RBI reiterates need for underlying forex exposure for rupee derivatives transactions | Stock Market News
5 April 2024, Mint

Killing a market, softly: How an RBI communique could end India's thriving ETCD market
7 April 2024, The Economic Times

Public preview: AKS cluster control plane metrics in managed Prometheus | Azure updates
12 February 2024, Microsoft

provided by Google News

Share this page