DBMS > Blazegraph vs. Graph Engine vs. JaguarDB vs. Postgres-XL

System Properties Comparison Blazegraph vs. Graph Engine vs. JaguarDB vs. Postgres-XL

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.

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

Performant, highly scalable DBMS for AI and IoT applications

Based on PostgreSQL enhanced with MPP and write-scale-out cluster features

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
RDF store

Graph DBMS
Key-value store

Key-value store
Vector DBMS

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	0.81
Rank	#213	Overall
	#19	Graph DBMS
	#8	RDF stores

Score	0.67
Rank	#232	Overall
	#21	Graph DBMS
	#34	Key-value stores

Score	0.06
Rank	#381	Overall
	#59	Key-value stores
	#13	Vector DBMS

Score	0.53
Rank	#254	Overall
	#117	Relational DBMS

Website

Technical documentation

wiki.blazegraph.com

www.graphengine.io/docs/manual

www.jaguardb.com/support.html

www.postgres-xl.org/documentation

Developer

Blazegraph

Microsoft

DataJaguar, Inc.

Initial release

2006

2010

2015

2014

since 2012, originally named StormDB

Current release

2.1.5, March 2019

3.3 July 2023

10 R1, October 2018

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

extended commercial license available

Open Source

MIT License

Open Source

GPL V3.0

Open Source

Mozilla public license

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++

the server part. Clients available in other languages

Server operating systems

Linux
OS X
Windows

.NET

Linux

Linux
macOS

Data scheme

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.

yes

XML type, but no XML query functionality

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SPARQL is used as query language

A subset of ANSI SQL is implemented

but no views, foreign keys, triggers

yes

distributed, parallel query execution

APIs and other access methods

Java API
RESTful HTTP API
SPARQL QUERY
SPARQL UPDATE
TinkerPop 3

RESTful HTTP API

JDBC
ODBC

ADO.NET
JDBC
native C library
ODBC
streaming API for large objects

Supported programming languages

.Net
C
C++
Java
JavaScript
PHP
Python
Ruby

C#
C++
F#
Visual Basic

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

.Net
C
C++
Delphi
Erlang
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Perl
PHP
Python
Tcl

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

user defined functions

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

horizontal partitioning

Sharding

horizontal partitioning

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

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

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

MVCC

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

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

rights management via user accounts

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

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

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

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

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

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 - DataScienceCentral.com
27 February 2019, Data Science Central

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

provided by Google News

Share this page