DBMS > Dgraph vs. HarperDB vs. Ingres vs. SQLite

System Properties Comparison Dgraph vs. HarperDB vs. Ingres vs. SQLite

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Distributed and scalable native Graph DBMS

Ultra-low latency distributed database with an intuitive REST API supporting NoSQL and SQL (including joins). Deployment of functions and databases simultaneously with a consolidated node-level architecture.

Well established RDBMS

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

Primary database model

Graph DBMS

Document store

Relational DBMS

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

Score	1.53
Rank	#152	Overall
	#15	Graph DBMS

Score	0.60
Rank	#244	Overall
	#38	Document stores

Score	3.80
Rank	#82	Overall
	#44	Relational DBMS

Score	111.41
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Website

dgraph.io

www.harperdb.io

www.actian.com/databases/ingres

www.sqlite.org

Technical documentation

dgraph.io/docs

docs.harperdb.io/docs

docs.actian.com/ingres

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

Developer

Dgraph Labs, Inc.

HarperDB

Actian Corporation

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Initial release

2016

2017

1974

originally developed at University Berkely in early 1970s

2000

Current release

3.1, August 2021

11.2, May 2022

3.46.0 (23 May 2024), May 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache 2.0

commercial

free community edition available

commercial

Open Source

Public Domain

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

Node.js

Server operating systems

Linux
OS X
Windows

Linux
OS X

AIX
HP Open VMS
HP-UX
Linux
Solaris
Windows

server-less

Data scheme

schema-free

dynamic schema

yes

dynamic column types

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

JSON data types

yes

not rigid because of 'dynamic typing' concept.

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.

but tools for importing/exporting data from/to XML-files available

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like data manipulation statements

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

APIs and other access methods

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

JDBC
ODBC
React Hooks
RESTful HTTP/JSON API
WebSocket

.NET Client API
JDBC
ODBC
proprietary protocol (OpenAPI)

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

Supported programming languages

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

.Net
C
C#
C++
ColdFusion
D
Dart
Delphi
Erlang
Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Lisp
MatLab
Objective C
Perl
PHP
PowerShell
Prolog
Python
R
Ruby
Rust
Scala
Swift

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

Custom Functions

since release 3.1

yes

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

yes

A table resides as a whole on one (or more) nodes in a cluster

horizontal partitioning

Ingres Star to access multiple databases simultaneously

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Synchronous replication via Raft

yes

the nodes on which a table resides can be defined

Ingres Replicator

none

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

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Atomic execution of specific operations

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

MVCC

yes

via file-system locks

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

yes, using LMDB

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

Access rights for users and roles

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.