DBMS > Blazegraph vs. Cubrid vs. Ehcache vs. JaguarDB

System Properties Comparison Blazegraph vs. Cubrid vs. Ehcache vs. JaguarDB

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Amazon has acquired Blazegraph's domain and (probably) product. It is said that Amazon Neptune is based on Blazegraph.

Description

High-performance graph database supporting Semantic Web (RDF/SPARQL) and Graph Database (tinkerpop3, blueprints, vertex-centric) APIs with scale-out and High Availability.

CUBRID is an open-source SQL-based relational database management system with object extensions for OLTP

A widely adopted Java cache with tiered storage options

Performant, highly scalable DBMS for AI and IoT applications

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
RDF store

Relational DBMS

Key-value store

Key-value store
Vector DBMS

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

Score	0.77
Rank	#222	Overall
	#20	Graph DBMS
	#8	RDF stores

Score	1.31
Rank	#169	Overall
	#78	Relational DBMS

Score	5.23
Rank	#68	Overall
	#8	Key-value stores

Score	0.09
Rank	#356	Overall
	#53	Key-value stores
	#13	Vector DBMS

Website

blazegraph.com

cubrid.com (korean)
cubrid.org (english)

www.ehcache.org

www.jaguardb.com

Technical documentation

wiki.blazegraph.com

cubrid.org/manuals

www.ehcache.org/documentation

www.jaguardb.com/support.html

Developer

Blazegraph

CUBRID Corporation, CUBRID Foundation

Terracotta Inc, owned by Software AG

DataJaguar, Inc.

Initial release

2006

2008

2009

2015

Current release

2.1.5, March 2019

11.0, January 2021

3.10.0, March 2022

3.3 July 2023

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

extended commercial license available

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

Open Source

Apache Version 2; commercial licenses available

Open Source

GPL V3.0

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++, Java

Java

C++

the server part. Clients available in other languages

Server operating systems

Linux
OS X
Windows

Linux
Windows

All OS with a Java VM

Linux

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

RDF literal 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.

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SPARQL is used as query language

yes

A subset of ANSI SQL is implemented

but no views, foreign keys, triggers

APIs and other access methods

Java API
RESTful HTTP API
SPARQL QUERY
SPARQL UPDATE
TinkerPop 3

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
OLE DB

JCache

JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

.Net
C
C++
Java
JavaScript
PHP
Python
Ruby

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

Java

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

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Java Stored Procedures

Triggers

yes

Cache Event Listeners

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

none

Sharding

by using Terracotta Server

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Source-replica replication

yes

by using Terracotta Server

Multi-source replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration

Immediate Consistency

Tunable Consistency (Strong, Eventual, Weak)

Eventual Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Relationships in Graphs

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

yes

supports JTA and can work as an XA resource

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

using a tiered cache-storage approach

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

Security and Authentication via Web Application Container (Tomcat, Jetty)

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

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

This AI Paper Introduces A Comprehensive RDF Dataset With Over 26 Billion Triples Covering Scholarly Data Across All Scientific Disciplines
19 August 2023, MarkTechPost

Back to the future: Does graph database success hang on query language?
5 March 2018, ZDNet

Harnessing GPUs Delivers a Big Speedup for Graph Analytics
15 December 2015, Datanami

Representation Learning on RDF* and LPG Knowledge Graphs
24 September 2020, Towards Data Science

Faster with GPUs: 5 turbocharged databases
26 September 2016, InfoWorld

provided by Google News

Jira Data Center user? Here's a critical Ehcache vulnerability to spoil your day
22 July 2021, The Register

Cache replication
19 August 2013, Packt Hub

Atlassian asks customers to patch critical Jira vulnerability
22 July 2021, BleepingComputer

Critical Jira Flaw in Atlassian Could Lead to RCE
22 July 2021, Threatpost

Migration From JBoss 5 to JBoss 7: All It Takes Is 11 Easy Steps
3 June 2021, hackernoon.com

provided by Google News

Share this page