DBMS > Dgraph vs. MySQL vs. Sequoiadb vs. SQLite vs. Tibero

System Properties Comparison Dgraph vs. MySQL vs. Sequoiadb vs. SQLite vs. Tibero

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Distributed and scalable native Graph DBMS

Widely used open source RDBMS

NewSQL database with distributed OLTP and SQL

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

A secure RDBMS, designed for easy portability from Oracle

Primary database model

Graph DBMS

Relational DBMS

Key/Value like access via memcached API

Document store
Relational DBMS

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	1.53
Rank	#152	Overall
	#15	Graph DBMS

Score	1061.34
Rank	#2	Overall
	#2	Relational DBMS

Score	0.50
Rank	#258	Overall
	#41	Document stores
	#120	Relational DBMS

Score	111.41
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Score	1.59
Rank	#148	Overall
	#68	Relational DBMS

Website

us.tmaxsoft.com/products/tibero

Technical documentation

dgraph.io/docs

dev.mysql.com/doc

www.sequoiadb.com/en/index.php?m=Files&a=index

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

technet.tmaxsoft.com/upload/download/online/tibero/pver-20150504-000002/index.html

Developer

Dgraph Labs, Inc.

Oracle

since 2010, originally MySQL AB, then Sun

Sequoiadb Ltd.

Dwayne Richard Hipp

TmaxSoft

Initial release

2016

1995

2013

2000

2003

Current release

8.4.0, April 2024

3.46.0 (23 May 2024), May 2024

6, April 2015

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

GPL version 2. Commercial licenses with extended functionallity are available

Open Source

Server: AGPL; Client: Apache V2

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.

Aiven for MySQL: Fully managed MySQL, deployable in the cloud of your choice, with seamless integrations and lightning-fast setup.

Implementation language

C and C++

C++

C and Assembler

Server operating systems

Linux
OS X
Windows

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

Linux

server-less

AIX
HP-UX
Linux
Solaris
Windows

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

schema-free

yes

dynamic column types

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

oid, date, timestamp, binary, regex

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

with proprietary extensions

SQL-like query language

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
JDBC
ODBC
Proprietary native API

proprietary protocol using JSON

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

JDBC
ODBC
ODP.NET
Oracle Call Interface (OCI)
Tibero CLI

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++
Java
PHP
Python

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

C
C#
C++
Cobol
Java
Objective-C
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby
Visual Basic

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

proprietary syntax

JavaScript

Persistent Stored Procedure (PSM)

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

yes

horizontal partitioning, sharding with MySQL Cluster or MySQL Fabric

Sharding

none

horizontal partitioning

by range, hash, list or composite

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Synchronous replication via Raft

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

Source-replica replication

none

Multi-source replication
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

Eventual Consistency

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

not for MyISAM storage engine

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

not for MyISAM storage engine

Document is locked during a transaction

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

table locks or row locks depending on storage engine

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

planned for next version

User concepts

Access control

Planned for future releases

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

no user groups or roles

simple password-based access control

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard (SQL 92, SQL 99)

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.