DBMS > AnzoGraph DB vs. Realm vs. Snowflake vs. Teradata

System Properties Comparison AnzoGraph DB vs. Realm vs. Snowflake 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

A DBMS built for use on mobile devices that’s a fast, easy to use alternative to SQLite and Core Data

Cloud-based data warehousing service for structured and semi-structured data

A hybrid cloud data analytics software platform (Teradata Vantage)

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
RDF store

Document store

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS
Time Series DBMS

DB-Engines Ranking measures the popularity of database management systems
Trend Chart

Score	0.27
Rank	#302	Overall
	#24	Graph DBMS
	#13	RDF stores

Score	7.71
Rank	#52	Overall
	#9	Document stores

Score	123.20
Rank	#9	Overall
	#6	Relational DBMS

Score	47.84
Rank	#21	Overall
	#15	Relational DBMS

Website

cambridgesemantics.com/anzograph

realm.io

www.snowflake.com

www.teradata.com

Technical documentation

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

realm.io/docs

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

docs.teradata.com

Developer

Cambridge Semantics

Realm, acquired by MongoDB in May 2019

Snowflake Computing Inc.

Teradata

Initial release

2018

2014

1984

Current release

2.3, January 2021

Teradata Vantage 1.0 MU2, January 2019

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free trial version available

Open Source

commercial

Cloud-based only

Only available as a cloud service

yes

DBaaS offerings (sponsored links)

Database as a Service

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

Server operating systems

Linux

Android
Backend: server-less
iOS
Windows

hosted

hosted
Linux

Data scheme

Schema-free and OWL/RDFS-schema support

yes

support of semi-structured data formats (JSON, XML, Avro)

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

SQL 2016 + extensions

APIs and other access methods

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

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

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

Supported programming languages

C++
Java
Python

.Net
Java

with Android only
Objective-C
React Native
Swift

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

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

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions and aggregates

runs within the applications so server-side scripts are unnecessary

user defined functions

yes

UDFs, stored procedures, table functions in parallel

Triggers

yes

Change Listeners

similar concept for controling cloud resources

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Automatic sharding

none

yes

Sharding

Hashing

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication in MPP-Cluster

none

yes

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

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

In-memory capabilities

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

yes

In-Memory realm

yes

User concepts

Access control

Access rights for users and roles

yes

Users with fine-grained authorization concept, user roles and pluggable authentication

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.