DBMS > Coveo vs. Microsoft SQL Server vs. TigerGraph vs. TinkerGraph vs. Valentina Server

System Properties Comparison Coveo vs. Microsoft SQL Server vs. TigerGraph vs. TinkerGraph vs. Valentina Server

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

AI-powered hosted search, recommendation and personalization platform providing tools for both low-code and full-code development

Microsofts flagship relational DBMS

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

A lightweight, in-memory graph engine that serves as a reference implementation of the TinkerPop3 API

Object-relational database and reports server

Primary database model

Secondary database models

Document store
Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	2.14
Rank	#116	Overall
	#11	Search engines

Score	807.76
Rank	#3	Overall
	#3	Relational DBMS

Score	1.44
Rank	#152	Overall
	#14	Graph DBMS

Score	0.08
Rank	#345	Overall
	#34	Graph DBMS

Score	0.18
Rank	#313	Overall
	#140	Relational DBMS

Website

www.coveo.com

www.microsoft.com/en-us/sql-server

www.tigergraph.com

tinkerpop.apache.org/docs/current/reference/#tinkergraph-gremlin

www.valentina-db.net

Technical documentation

docs.coveo.com

learn.microsoft.com/en-US/sql/sql-server

docs.tigergraph.com

valentina-db.com/docs/dokuwiki/v5/doku.php

Developer

Coveo

Microsoft

Paradigma Software

Initial release

2012

1989

2017

2009

1999

Current release

SQL Server 2022, November 2022

5.7.5

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

restricted free version is available

commercial

Open Source

Apache 2.0

commercial

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.

SQLServer Flex @ STACKIT offers a managed version of SQL Server with adjustable CPU, RAM, storage amount and speed, in enterprise grade to perfectly match all application requirements. All services are 100% GDPR-compliant.

Implementation language

C++

Java

Server operating systems

hosted

Linux
Windows

Linux

Linux
OS X
Windows

Data scheme

hybrid - fields need to be configured prior to indexing, but relationships can be exploited at query time without pre-configuration

yes

schema-free

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.

yes

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

SQL-like query language (GSQL)

yes

APIs and other access methods

RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
OLE DB
Tabular Data Stream (TDS)

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

TinkerPop 3

ODBC

Supported programming languages

C#
Java
JavaScript
Python

C#
C++
Delphi
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Visual Basic

C++
Java

Groovy
Java

.Net
C
C#
C++
Objective-C
PHP
Ruby
Visual Basic
Visual Basic.NET

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Transact SQL, .NET languages, R, Python and (with SQL Server 2019) Java

yes

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

yes

tables can be distributed across several files (horizontal partitioning); sharding through federation

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

yes, but depending on the SQL-Server Edition

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

none

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Relationships in graphs

yes

Relationships in graphs

yes

Transaction concepts

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

yes

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

optional

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

granular access controls, API key management, content filters

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Role-based access control

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.