DBMS > AnzoGraph DB vs. Stardog vs. SWC-DB vs. Transbase

System Properties Comparison AnzoGraph DB vs. Stardog vs. SWC-DB vs. Transbase

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

Enterprise Knowledge Graph platform and graph DBMS with high availability, high performance reasoning, and virtualization

A high performance, scalable Wide Column DBMS

A resource-optimized, high-performance, universally applicable RDBMS

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
RDF store

Wide column store

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

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	2.05
Rank	#129	Overall
	#11	Graph DBMS
	#6	RDF stores

Score	0.01
Rank	#387	Overall
	#13	Wide column stores

Score	0.15
Rank	#337	Overall
	#147	Relational DBMS

Website

cambridgesemantics.com/anzograph

www.stardog.com

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

www.transaction.de/en/products/transbase.html

Technical documentation

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

docs.stardog.com

www.transaction.de/en/products/transbase/features.html

Developer

Cambridge Semantics

Stardog-Union

Alex Kashirin

Transaction Software GmbH

Initial release

2018

2010

2020

1987

Current release

2.3, January 2021

7.3.0, May 2020

0.5, April 2021

Transbase 8.3, 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free trial version available

commercial

60-day fully-featured trial license; 1-year fully-featured non-commercial use license for academics/students

Open Source

GPL V3

commercial

free development license

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++

C and C++

Server operating systems

Linux

Linux
macOS
Windows

Linux

FreeBSD
Linux
macOS
Solaris
Windows

Data scheme

Schema-free and OWL/RDFS-schema support

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.

Import/export of XML data possible

Secondary indexes

yes

supports real-time indexing in full-text and geospatial

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

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

Yes, compatible with all major SQL variants through dedicated BI/SQL Server

SQL-like query language

yes

APIs and other access methods

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

GraphQL query language
HTTP API
Jena RDF API
OWL
RDF4J API
Sesame REST HTTP Protocol
SNARL
SPARQL
Spring Data
Stardog Studio
TinkerPop 3

Proprietary protocol
Thrift

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
Proprietary native API

Supported programming languages

C++
Java
Python

.Net
Clojure
Groovy
Java
JavaScript
Python
Ruby

C++

C
C#
C++
Java
JavaScript
Kotlin
Objective-C
PHP
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions and aggregates

user defined functions and aggregates, HTTP Server extensions in Java

yes

Triggers

yes

via event handlers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Automatic sharding

none

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication in MPP-Cluster

Multi-source replication in HA-Cluster

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 in HA-Cluster

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

not needed in graphs

yes

relationships in graphs

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

yes

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

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

How Knowledge Graphs Automate Data Preparation
15 July 2020, Database Trends and Applications

provided by Google News

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

provided by Google News

Share this page