DBMS > Apache IoTDB vs. Coveo vs. Dgraph vs. MySQL

System Properties Comparison Apache IoTDB vs. Coveo vs. Dgraph vs. MySQL

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

An IoT native database with high performance for data management and analysis, deployable on the edge and the cloud and integrated with Hadoop, Spark and Flink

AI-powered hosted search, recommendation and personalization platform providing tools for both low-code and full-code development

Distributed and scalable native Graph DBMS

Widely used open source RDBMS

Primary database model

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	1.31
Rank	#164	Overall
	#14	Time Series DBMS

Score	2.11
Rank	#118	Overall
	#11	Search engines

Score	1.53
Rank	#152	Overall
	#15	Graph DBMS

Score	1061.34
Rank	#2	Overall
	#2	Relational DBMS

Website

Technical documentation

iotdb.apache.org/UserGuide/Master/QuickStart/QuickStart.html

docs.coveo.com

dgraph.io/docs

dev.mysql.com/doc

Developer

Apache Software Foundation

Coveo

Dgraph Labs, Inc.

Oracle

since 2010, originally MySQL AB, then Sun

Initial release

2018

2012

2016

1995

Current release

1.1.0, April 2023

8.4.0, April 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

commercial

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

GPL version 2. Commercial licenses with extended functionallity are available

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.

Aiven for MySQL: Fully managed MySQL, deployable in the cloud of your choice, with seamless integrations and lightning-fast setup.

Implementation language

Java

C and C++

Server operating systems

All OS with a Java VM (>= 1.8)

hosted

Linux
OS X
Windows

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

Data scheme

yes

hybrid - fields need to be configured prior to indexing, but relationships can be exploited at query time without pre-configuration

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

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language

yes

with proprietary extensions

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
Native API

RESTful HTTP API

GraphQL query language
gRPC (using protocol buffers) API
HTTP API

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
Proprietary native API

Supported programming languages

C
C#
C++
Go
Java
Python
Scala

C#
Java
JavaScript
Python

C#
C++
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
Ruby

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

yes

proprietary syntax

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

horizontal partitioning (by time range) + vertical partitioning (by deviceId)

yes

horizontal partitioning, sharding with MySQL Cluster or MySQL Fabric

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

selectable replication methods; using Raft/IoTConsensus algorithm to ensure strong/eventual data consistency among multiple replicas

yes

Synchronous replication via Raft

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Integration with Hadoop and Spark

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Eventual Consistency
Strong Consistency with Raft

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

yes

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

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

yes

granular access controls, API key management, content filters

Planned for future releases

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.