DBMS > CockroachDB vs. Graph Engine vs. IBM Db2 warehouse vs. MySQL

System Properties Comparison CockroachDB vs. Graph Engine vs. IBM Db2 warehouse vs. MySQL

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

CockroachDB is a distributed database architected for modern cloud applications. It is wire compatible with PostgreSQL and backed by a Key-Value Store, which is either RocksDB or a purpose-built derivative, called Pebble.

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

Cloud-based data warehousing service

Widely used open source RDBMS

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Graph DBMS
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Key/Value like access via memcached API

Secondary database models

Document store
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	4.74
Rank	#67	Overall
	#36	Relational DBMS

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

Score	1.26
Rank	#162	Overall
	#73	Relational DBMS

Score	1029.49
Rank	#2	Overall
	#2	Relational DBMS

Website

www.cockroachlabs.com

www.graphengine.io

www.ibm.com/products/db2/warehouse

www.mysql.com

Technical documentation

www.cockroachlabs.com/docs

www.graphengine.io/docs/manual

dev.mysql.com/doc

Developer

Cockroach Labs

Microsoft

IBM

Oracle

since 2010, originally MySQL AB, then Sun

Initial release

2015

2010

2014

1995

Current release

24.1.0, May 2024

9.0.0, July 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache 2.0, commercial license available

Open Source

MIT License

commercial

Open Source

GPL version 2. Commercial licenses with extended functionallity are available

Cloud-based only

Only available as a cloud service

yes

DBaaS offerings (sponsored links)

Database as a Service

Providers of DBaaS offerings, please contact us to be listed.

Implementation language

.NET and C

C and C++

Server operating systems

Linux
macOS
Windows

.NET

hosted

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

Data scheme

dynamic schema

yes

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

yes

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes, wire compatible with PostgreSQL

yes

with proprietary extensions

APIs and other access methods

JDBC

RESTful HTTP API

.NET Client API
JDBC
ODBC
OLE DB

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
Proprietary native API

Supported programming languages

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

C#
C++
F#
Visual Basic

Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Perl
PHP
Python
R
Ruby

Ada
C
C#
C++
D
Delphi
Eiffel
Erlang
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scheme
Tcl

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

PL/SQL, SQL PL

yes

proprietary syntax

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

horizontal partitioning (by key range)

all tables are translated to an ordered KV store and then broken down into 64MB ranges, which are then used as replicas in RAFT

horizontal partitioning

Sharding

horizontal partitioning, sharding with MySQL Cluster or MySQL Fabric

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication using RAFT

yes

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

not for MyISAM storage engine

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

not for MyISAM storage engine

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

table locks or row locks depending on storage engine

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

Role-based access control

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

no user groups or 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.