DBMS > Apache Drill vs. BaseX vs. Graph Engine vs. MySQL

System Properties Comparison Apache Drill vs. BaseX vs. Graph Engine vs. MySQL

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Schema-free SQL Query Engine for Hadoop, NoSQL and Cloud Storage

Light-weight Native XML DBMS with support for XQuery 3.0 and interactive GUI.

A distributed in-memory data processing engine, underpinned by a strongly-typed RAM store and a general distributed computation engine

Widely used open source RDBMS

Primary database model

Document store
Relational DBMS

Native XML DBMS

Graph DBMS
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Key/Value like access via memcached API

Secondary database models

Document store
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	2.02
Rank	#124	Overall
	#22	Document stores
	#59	Relational DBMS

Score	1.84
Rank	#135	Overall
	#4	Native XML DBMS

Score	0.67
Rank	#232	Overall
	#21	Graph DBMS
	#34	Key-value stores

Score	1061.34
Rank	#2	Overall
	#2	Relational DBMS

Website

Technical documentation

drill.apache.org/docs

docs.basex.org

www.graphengine.io/docs/manual

dev.mysql.com/doc

Developer

Apache Software Foundation

BaseX GmbH

Microsoft

Oracle

since 2010, originally MySQL AB, then Sun

Initial release

2012

2007

2010

1995

Current release

1.20.3, January 2023

10.7, August 2023

8.4.0, April 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache Version 2

Open Source

BSD license

Open Source

MIT License

Open Source

GPL version 2. Commercial licenses with extended functionallity are available

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

Java

.NET and C

C and C++

Server operating systems

Linux
OS X
Windows

.NET

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

XQuery supports types

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

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL SELECT statement is SQL:2003 compliant

yes

with proprietary extensions

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

Java API
RESTful HTTP API
RESTXQ
WebDAV
XML:DB
XQJ

RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
Proprietary native API

Supported programming languages

C++

Actionscript
C
C#
Haskell
Java
JavaScript

Node.js
Lisp
Perl
PHP
Python
Qt
Rebol
Ruby
Scala
Visual Basic

C#
C++
F#
Visual Basic

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

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

yes

proprietary syntax

Triggers

yes

via events

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

none

horizontal partitioning

horizontal partitioning, sharding with MySQL Cluster or MySQL Fabric

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

none

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

not for MyISAM storage engine

Transaction concepts

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

multiple readers, single writer

ACID

not for MyISAM storage engine

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

table locks or row locks depending on storage engine

Durability

Support for making data persistent

Depending on the underlying data source

yes

optional: either by committing a write-ahead log (WAL) to the local persistent storage or by dumping the memory to a persistent storage

yes

In-memory capabilities

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

Depending on the underlying data source

yes

User concepts

Access control

Depending on the underlying data source

Users with fine-grained authorization concept on 4 levels

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

no user groups or roles

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.