DBMS > Coveo vs. MySQL vs. TinkerGraph vs. VoltDB

System Properties Comparison Coveo vs. MySQL vs. TinkerGraph vs. VoltDB

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

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

Widely used open source RDBMS

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

Distributed In-Memory NewSQL RDBMS

Used for OLTP applications with a high frequency of relatively simple transactions, that can hold all their data in memory

Primary database model

Search engine

Relational DBMS

Key/Value like access via memcached API

Graph DBMS

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	2.14
Rank	#116	Overall
	#11	Search engines

Score	1029.49
Rank	#2	Overall
	#2	Relational DBMS

Score	0.08
Rank	#345	Overall
	#34	Graph DBMS

Score	1.38
Rank	#156	Overall
	#72	Relational DBMS

Website

www.coveo.com

www.mysql.com

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

www.voltdb.com

Technical documentation

docs.coveo.com

dev.mysql.com/doc

docs.voltdb.com

Developer

Coveo

Oracle

since 2010, originally MySQL AB, then Sun

VoltDB Inc.

Initial release

2012

1995

2009

2010

Current release

9.0.0, July 2024

11.3, April 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

GPL version 2. Commercial licenses with extended functionallity are available

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

AGPL for Community Edition, commercial license for Enterprise, AWS, and Pro Editions

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

C and C++

Java

Java, C++

Server operating systems

hosted

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

Linux
OS X

for development

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

with proprietary extensions

yes

only a subset of SQL 99

APIs and other access methods

RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
Proprietary native API

TinkerPop 3

Java API
JDBC
RESTful HTTP/JSON API

Supported programming languages

C#
Java
JavaScript
Python

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

Groovy
Java

C#
C++
Erlang

not officially supported
Go
Java
JavaScript

Node.js
PHP
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

proprietary syntax

Java

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

yes

horizontal partitioning, sharding with MySQL Cluster or MySQL Fabric

none

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

none

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

none

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

not for MyISAM storage engine

yes

Relationships in graphs

FOREIGN KEY constraints are not supported

Transaction concepts

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

yes

ACID

not for MyISAM storage engine

ACID

Transactions are executed single-threaded within stored procedures

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

table locks or row locks depending on storage engine

yes

Data access is serialized by the server

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

optional

yes

Snapshots and command logging

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

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

no user groups or roles

Users and roles with access to stored procedures

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.