DBMS > Axibase vs. CrateDB vs. Graph Engine vs. SWC-DB

System Properties Comparison Axibase vs. CrateDB vs. Graph Engine vs. SWC-DB

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Scalable TimeSeries DBMS based on HBase with integrated rule engine and visualization

Distributed Database based on Lucene

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

A high performance, scalable Wide Column DBMS

Primary database model

Time Series DBMS

Document store
Spatial DBMS
Search engine
Time Series DBMS
Vector DBMS

Graph DBMS
Key-value store

Wide column store

Secondary database models

Relational DBMS

Time Series DBMS

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

Score	0.21
Rank	#308	Overall
	#25	Time Series DBMS

Score	0.69
Rank	#226	Overall
	#37	Document stores
	#5	Spatial DBMS
	#16	Search engines
	#19	Time Series DBMS
	#11	Vector DBMS

Score	0.56
Rank	#241	Overall
	#21	Graph DBMS
	#34	Key-value stores

Score	0.01
Rank	#378	Overall
	#13	Wide column stores

Website

axibase.com/docs/atsd/finance

cratedb.com

www.graphengine.io

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

Technical documentation

cratedb.com/docs

www.graphengine.io/docs/manual

Developer

Axibase Corporation

Crate

Microsoft

Alex Kashirin

Initial release

2013

2010

2020

Current release

15585

5.8.1, August 2024

0.5, April 2021

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Community Edition (single node) is free, Enterprise Edition (distributed) is paid

Open Source

MIT License

Open Source

GPL V3

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

C++

Server operating systems

Linux

All Operating Systems, including Kubernetes with CrateDB Kubernetes Operator support

.NET

Linux

Data scheme

yes

Flexible Schema (defined schema, partial schema, schema free)

yes

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

short, integer, long, float, double, decimal, string

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.

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language

yes, but no triggers and constraints, and PostgreSQL compatibility

SQL-like query language

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
Proprietary protocol (Network API)
RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
PostgreSQL wire protocol
Prometheus Remote Read/Write
RESTful HTTP API

RESTful HTTP API

Proprietary protocol
Thrift

Supported programming languages

Go
Java
PHP
Python
R
Ruby

.NET
Erlang
Go

community maintained client
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)

community maintained client
Perl

community maintained client
PHP
Python
R
Ruby

community maintained client
Scala

community maintained client

C#
C++
F#
Visual Basic

C++

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

user defined functions (Javascript)

yes

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

horizontal partitioning

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Source-replica replication

Configurable replication on table/partition-level

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Eventual Consistency
Read-after-write consistency on record level

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

Transaction concepts

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

unique row identifiers can be used for implementing an optimistic concurrency control strategy

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

In-memory capabilities

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

yes

User concepts

Access control

rights management via user accounts

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

The Ultimate ATV Test: Suzuki’s King Quad 750 AXI Rugged Package vs. Alaska’s Hunting Season
14 October 2020, Outdoor Life

provided by Google News

CrateDB Appoints Jeff Olson as New CRO
9 July 2024, PR Newswire

CrateDB Announces Availability of CrateDB on Google Cloud Marketplace
8 April 2024, Datanami

Taleo Consulting and CrateDB Announce Strategic Partnership to Transform Data Management and Analytics in Financial Services markets
29 July 2024, PR Newswire

How We Designed CrateDB as a Realtime SQL DBMS for the Internet of Things
29 August 2017, The New Stack

CrateDB Appoints Sergey Gerasimenko as New CTO
19 February 2024, PR Newswire

provided by Google News

Trinity
30 October 2010, Microsoft

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

The graph analytics landscape 2019
27 February 2019, Data Science Central

Aerospike Is Now a Graph Database, Too
21 June 2023, Datanami

provided by Google News

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

provided by Google News

Share this page