DBMS > Blazegraph vs. etcd vs. FatDB vs. SQLite

System Properties Comparison Blazegraph vs. etcd vs. FatDB vs. SQLite

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.

FatDB/FatCloud has ceased operations as a company with February 2014. FatDB is discontinued and excluded from the ranking.

Description

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

A distributed reliable key-value store

A .NET NoSQL DBMS that can integrate with and extend SQL Server.

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
RDF store

Key-value store

Document store
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

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

Score	0.74
Rank	#217	Overall
	#19	Graph DBMS
	#8	RDF stores

Score	7.05
Rank	#53	Overall
	#5	Key-value stores

Score	103.35
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Website

blazegraph.com

etcd.io
github.com/etcd-io/etcd

www.sqlite.org

Technical documentation

wiki.blazegraph.com

etcd.io/docs
github.com/etcd-io/etcd/tree/master/Documentation

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

Developer

Blazegraph

FatCloud

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Initial release

2006

2012

2000

Current release

2.1.5, March 2019

3.4, August 2019

3.46.1 (13 August 2024), August 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

extended commercial license available

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

commercial

Open Source

Public Domain

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

Server operating systems

Linux
OS X
Windows

FreeBSD
Linux
Windows

experimental

Windows

server-less

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

dynamic column types

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

RDF literal types

yes

not rigid because of 'dynamic typing' concept.

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

Via inetgration in SQL Server

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

APIs and other access methods

Java API
RESTful HTTP API
SPARQL QUERY
SPARQL UPDATE
TinkerPop 3

gRPC
JSON over HTTP

.NET Client API
LINQ
RESTful HTTP API
RPC
Windows WCF Bindings

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

Supported programming languages

.Net
C
C++
Java
JavaScript
PHP
Python
Ruby

.Net
C
C++
Clojure
Erlang
Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Perl
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Rust
Scala
Tcl

Actionscript
Ada
Basic
C
C#
C++
D
Delphi
Forth
Fortran
Haskell
Java
JavaScript
Lisp
Lua
MatLab
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
PL/SQL
Python
R
Ruby
Scala
Scheme
Smalltalk
Tcl

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

via applications

Triggers

yes, watching key changes

yes

via applications

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Using Raft consensus algorithm to ensure data replication with strong consistency among multiple replicas.

selectable replication factor

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Relationships in Graphs

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

via file-system locks

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

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

Can implement custom security layer via applications

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.