DBMS > Dgraph vs. MySQL vs. RavenDB vs. SwayDB

System Properties Comparison Dgraph vs. MySQL vs. RavenDB vs. SwayDB

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Distributed and scalable native Graph DBMS

Widely used open source RDBMS

Open Source Operational and Transactional Enterprise NoSQL Document Database

An embeddable, non-blocking, type-safe key-value store for single or multiple disks and in-memory storage

Primary database model

Graph DBMS

Relational DBMS

Key/Value like access via memcached API

Document store

Key-value store

Secondary database models

Document store
Spatial DBMS

Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS
Time Series DBMS

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

Score	1.39
Rank	#155	Overall
	#15	Graph DBMS

Score	1029.49
Rank	#2	Overall
	#2	Relational DBMS

Score	2.68
Rank	#102	Overall
	#19	Document stores

Score	0.00
Rank	#384	Overall
	#60	Key-value stores

Website

Technical documentation

dgraph.io/docs

dev.mysql.com/doc

ravendb.net/docs

Developer

Dgraph Labs, Inc.

Oracle

since 2010, originally MySQL AB, then Sun

Hibernating Rhinos

Simer Plaha

Initial release

2016

1995

2010

2018

Current release

9.0.0, July 2024

5.4, July 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

GPL version 2. Commercial licenses with extended functionallity are available

Open Source

AGPL version 3, commercial license available

Open Source

GNU Affero GPL V3.0

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

C and C++

Scala

Server operating systems

Linux
OS X
Windows

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

Linux
macOS
Raspberry Pi
Windows

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

schema-free

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

SQL-like query language (RQL)

APIs and other access methods

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

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
Proprietary native API

.NET Client API
F# Client API
Go Client API
Java Client API
NodeJS Client API
PHP Client API
Python Client API
RESTful HTTP API

Supported programming languages

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

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

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

Java
Kotlin
Scala

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

proprietary syntax

yes

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

yes

horizontal partitioning, sharding with MySQL Cluster or MySQL Fabric

Sharding

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Synchronous replication via Raft

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

Multi-source replication

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Default ACID transactions on the local node (eventually consistent across the cluster). Atomic operations with cluster-wide ACID transactions. Eventual consistency for indexes and full-text search indexes.

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

not for MyISAM storage engine

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

not for MyISAM storage engine

ACID, Cluster-wide transaction available

Atomic execution of operations

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

table locks or row locks depending on storage engine

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

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

no user groups or roles

Authorization levels configured per client per database

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.