DBMS > Dgraph vs. LevelDB vs. Snowflake vs. Transbase

System Properties Comparison Dgraph vs. LevelDB vs. Snowflake vs. Transbase

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Distributed and scalable native Graph DBMS

Embeddable fast key-value storage library that provides an ordered mapping from string keys to string values

Cloud-based data warehousing service for structured and semi-structured data

A resource-optimized, high-performance, universally applicable RDBMS

Primary database model

Graph DBMS

Key-value store

Relational DBMS

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

Score	1.45
Rank	#156	Overall
	#15	Graph DBMS

Score	2.35
Rank	#111	Overall
	#19	Key-value stores

Score	121.33
Rank	#9	Overall
	#6	Relational DBMS

Score	0.11
Rank	#341	Overall
	#150	Relational DBMS

Website

dgraph.io

github.com/google/leveldb

www.snowflake.com

www.transaction.de/en/products/transbase.html

Technical documentation

dgraph.io/docs

github.com/google/leveldb/blob/main/doc/index.md

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

www.transaction.de/en/products/transbase/features.html

Developer

Dgraph Labs, Inc.

Google

Snowflake Computing Inc.

Transaction Software GmbH

Initial release

2016

2011

2014

1987

Current release

1.23, February 2021

Transbase 8.3, 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

BSD

commercial

free development license

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++

C and C++

Server operating systems

Linux
OS X
Windows

Illumos
Linux
OS X
Windows

hosted

FreeBSD
Linux
macOS
Solaris
Windows

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

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

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

APIs and other access methods

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

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
Proprietary native API

Supported programming languages

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

C++
Go
Java

3rd party binding
JavaScript (Node.js)

3rd party binding
Python

3rd party binding

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

C
C#
C++
Java
JavaScript
Kotlin
Objective-C
PHP
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

yes

Triggers

similar concept for controling cloud resources

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

yes

none

yes

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Synchronous replication via Raft

none

yes

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

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

yes

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

with automatic compression on writes

yes

In-memory capabilities

Is there an option to define some or all structures to be held in-memory only.

User concepts

Access control

Planned for future releases

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

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.