DBMS > Dgraph vs. Faircom EDGE vs. SQLite vs. Yaacomo

System Properties Comparison Dgraph vs. Faircom EDGE vs. SQLite vs. Yaacomo

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Yaacomo seems to be discontinued and is removed from the DB-Engines ranking

Description

Distributed and scalable native Graph DBMS

FairCom EDGE is an Industry 4.0 solution built to integrate, collect, aggregate and synchronize mission-critical data in edge computing environments

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

OpenCL based in-memory RDBMS, designed for efficiently utilizing the hardware via parallel computing

Primary database model

Graph DBMS

Key-value store
Relational DBMS

Relational DBMS

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

Score	1.45
Rank	#156	Overall
	#15	Graph DBMS

Score	0.02
Rank	#368	Overall
	#54	Key-value stores
	#156	Relational DBMS

Score	114.32
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Website

dgraph.io

www.faircom.com/products/faircom-edge

www.sqlite.org

yaacomo.com

Technical documentation

dgraph.io/docs

docs.faircom.com/docs/en/UUID-23d4f1fd-d213-f6d5-b92e-9b7475baa14e.html

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

Developer

Dgraph Labs, Inc.

FairCom Corporation

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Q2WEB GmbH

Initial release

2016

1979

2000

2009

Current release

V3, October 2020

3.45.3 (15 April 2024), April 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache 2.0

commercial

Restricted, free version available

Open Source

Public Domain

commercial

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

ANSI C, C++

Server operating systems

Linux
OS X
Windows

Android
Linux

ARM, x86
Raspbian
Windows

server-less

Android
Linux
Windows

Data scheme

schema-free

Flexible Schema (defined schema, partial schema, schema free)

yes

dynamic column types

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

yes, ANSI Standard SQL Types

yes

not rigid because of 'dynamic typing' concept.

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

ANSI SQL queries

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

yes

APIs and other access methods

GraphQL query language
gRPC (using protocol buffers) API
HTTP API

ADO.NET
Direct SQL
IoT Microservice layer
JDBC
MQTT (Message Queue Telemetry Transport)
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

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

C
C#
C++
Java
JavaScript
PHP
Python
VB.Net

Actionscript
Ada
Basic
C
C#
C++
D
Delphi
Forth
Fortran
Haskell
Java
JavaScript
Lisp
Lua
MatLab
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
PL/SQL
Python
R
Ruby
Scala
Scheme
Smalltalk
Tcl

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

.Net, JavaScript, C/C++

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

yes

File partitioning

Customizable business rules for partitioning

none

horizontal partitioning

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Synchronous replication via Raft

yes

Synchronous and asynchronous realtime replication based on transaction logs

none

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

Immediate Consistency
Tunable Consistency

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

when using SQL

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

across SQL and NoSQL

yes

via file-system locks

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

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

Planned for future releases

Fine grained user, group and file access rights managed across SQL (per ANSI standard) and NoSQL.

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.