DBMS > ArcadeDB vs. Graph Engine vs. Lovefield vs. Stardog

System Properties Comparison ArcadeDB vs. Graph Engine vs. Lovefield vs. Stardog

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Fast and scalable multi-model DBMS, originally forked from OrientDB but most of the code has been rewritten

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

Embeddable relational database for web apps written in pure JavaScript

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

Primary database model

Document store
Graph DBMS
Key-value store
Time Series DBMS

in next version

Graph DBMS
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Graph DBMS
RDF store

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

Score	0.02
Rank	#366	Overall
	#50	Document stores
	#38	Graph DBMS
	#53	Key-value stores
	#36	Time Series DBMS

Score	0.61
Rank	#240	Overall
	#21	Graph DBMS
	#35	Key-value stores

Score	0.29
Rank	#293	Overall
	#133	Relational DBMS

Score	2.02
Rank	#123	Overall
	#11	Graph DBMS
	#6	RDF stores

Website

arcadedb.com

www.graphengine.io

google.github.io/lovefield

www.stardog.com

Technical documentation

docs.arcadedb.com

www.graphengine.io/docs/manual

github.com/google/lovefield/blob/master/docs/spec_index.md

docs.stardog.com

Developer

Arcade Data

Microsoft

Google

Stardog-Union

Initial release

2021

2010

2014

2010

Current release

September 2021

2.1.12, February 2017

7.3.0, May 2020

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

Open Source

MIT License

Open Source

Apache 2.0

commercial

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

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

.NET and C

JavaScript

Java

Server operating systems

All OS with a Java VM

.NET

server-less, requires a JavaScript environment (browser, Node.js)

tested with Chrome, Firefox, IE, Safari

Linux
macOS
Windows

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

schema-free and OWL/RDFS-schema support

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

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language, no joins

SQL-like query language

via JavaScript builder pattern

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

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
MongoDB API
OpenCypher
PostgreSQL wire protocol
Redis API
RESTful HTTP/JSON API
TinkerPop Gremlin

RESTful HTTP API

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

Supported programming languages

Java

C#
C++
F#
Visual Basic

JavaScript

.Net
Clojure
Groovy
Java
JavaScript
Python
Ruby

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

user defined functions and aggregates, HTTP Server extensions in Java

Triggers

Using read-only observers

yes

via event handlers

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

horizontal partitioning

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Source-replica replication

none

Multi-source replication in HA-Cluster

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Immediate Consistency in HA-Cluster

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

relationship in graphs

yes

relationships in graphs

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

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

yes, by using IndexedDB or the cloud service Firebase Realtime Database

yes

In-memory capabilities

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

yes

using MemoryDB

yes

User concepts

Access control

Access rights for users and 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.

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

Trinity
2 June 2023, microsoft.com

Open source Microsoft Graph Engine takes on Neo4j
13 February 2017, InfoWorld

IBM releases Graph, a service that can outperform SQL databases
27 July 2016, GeekWire

How Google and Microsoft taught search to "understand" the Web
6 June 2012, Ars Technica

The graph analytics landscape 2019 - DataScienceCentral.com
27 February 2019, Data Science Central

provided by Google News

Share this page