DBMS > Dgraph vs. etcd vs. Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB vs. Valentina Server

System Properties Comparison Dgraph vs. etcd vs. Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB vs. Valentina Server

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Distributed and scalable native Graph DBMS

A distributed reliable key-value store

Globally distributed, horizontally scalable, multi-model database service

Object-relational database and reports server

Primary database model

Graph DBMS

Key-value store

Document store
Graph DBMS
Key-value store
Wide column store

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Spatial DBMS

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

Score	1.45
Rank	#156	Overall
	#15	Graph DBMS

Score	7.25
Rank	#54	Overall
	#5	Key-value stores

Score	29.04
Rank	#27	Overall
	#4	Document stores
	#2	Graph DBMS
	#3	Key-value stores
	#3	Wide column stores

Score	0.17
Rank	#327	Overall
	#145	Relational DBMS

Website

dgraph.io

etcd.io
github.com/etcd-io/etcd

azure.microsoft.com/services/cosmos-db

www.valentina-db.net

Technical documentation

dgraph.io/docs

etcd.io/docs
github.com/etcd-io/etcd/tree/master/Documentation

learn.microsoft.com/azure/cosmos-db

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

Developer

Dgraph Labs, Inc.

Microsoft

Paradigma Software

Initial release

2016

2014

1999

Current release

3.4, August 2019

5.7.5

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

Apache Version 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.

Implementation language

Server operating systems

Linux
OS X
Windows

FreeBSD
Linux
Windows

experimental

hosted

Linux
OS X
Windows

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

JSON types

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.

Secondary indexes

yes

All properties auto-indexed by default

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language

yes

APIs and other access methods

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

gRPC
JSON over HTTP

DocumentDB API
Graph API (Gremlin)
MongoDB API
RESTful HTTP API
Table API

ODBC

Supported programming languages

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

.Net
C
C++
Clojure
Erlang
Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Perl
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Rust
Scala
Tcl

.Net
C#
Java
JavaScript
JavaScript (Node.js)
MongoDB client drivers written for various programming languages
Python

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

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

JavaScript

yes

Triggers

yes, watching key changes

JavaScript

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

yes

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Synchronous replication via Raft

Using Raft consensus algorithm to ensure data replication with strong consistency among multiple replicas.

yes

Implicit feature of the cloud service

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

with Hadoop integration

Integration with Hadoop/HDInsight on Azure*

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Bounded Staleness
Consistent Prefix
Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Consistency level configurable on request level
Session Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Multi-item ACID transactions with snapshot isolation within a partition

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

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

Access rights can be defined down to the item level

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.