DBMS > CouchDB vs. Graph Engine vs. Snowflake vs. TigerGraph vs. ToroDB

System Properties Comparison CouchDB vs. Graph Engine vs. Snowflake vs. TigerGraph vs. ToroDB

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

ToroDB seems to be discontinued. Therefore it is excluded from the DB-Engines Ranking.

Description

A native JSON - document store inspired by Lotus Notes, scalable from globally distributed server-clusters down to mobile phones.

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 for structured and semi-structured data

A complete, distributed, parallel graph computing platform supporting web-scale data analytics in real-time

A MongoDB-compatible JSON document store, built on top of PostgreSQL

Primary database model

Document store

Graph DBMS
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Graph DBMS

Document store

Secondary database models

Spatial DBMS

using the Geocouch extension

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

Score	8.30
Rank	#47	Overall
	#7	Document stores

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

Score	130.36
Rank	#8	Overall
	#5	Relational DBMS

Score	1.80
Rank	#138	Overall
	#13	Graph DBMS

Website

github.com/torodb/server

Technical documentation

docs.couchdb.org/en/stable

www.graphengine.io/docs/manual

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

docs.tigergraph.com

Developer

Apache Software Foundation

Apache top-level project, originally developed by Damien Katz, a former Lotus Notes developer

Microsoft

Snowflake Computing Inc.

8Kdata

Initial release

2005

2010

2014

2017

2016

Current release

3.3.3, December 2023

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache version 2

Open Source

MIT License

commercial

Open Source

AGPL-V3

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

Erlang

.NET and C

C++

Java

Server operating systems

Android
BSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

.NET

hosted

Linux

All OS with a Java 7 VM

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

support of semi-structured data formats (JSON, XML, Avro)

yes

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

string, integer, double, boolean, date, object_id

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

Secondary indexes

yes

via views

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

SQL-like query language (GSQL)

APIs and other access methods

RESTful HTTP/JSON API

RESTful HTTP API

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

GSQL (TigerGraph Query Language)
Kafka
RESTful HTTP/JSON API

Supported programming languages

C
C#
ColdFusion
Erlang
Haskell
Java
JavaScript
Lisp
Lua
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
PL/SQL
Python
Ruby
Smalltalk

C#
C++
F#
Visual Basic

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

C++
Java

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

View functions in JavaScript

yes

user defined functions

yes

Triggers

yes

similar concept for controling cloud resources

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

improved architecture with release 2.0

horizontal partitioning

yes

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

yes

Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Eventual Consistency

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Relationships in graphs

Transaction concepts

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

atomic operations within a single document possible

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

strategy: optimistic locking

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

Access rights for users can be defined per database

Users with fine-grained authorization concept, user roles and pluggable authentication

Role-based access control

Access rights for users and 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.