DBMS > Dgraph vs. MySQL vs. Snowflake vs. SWC-DB vs. TinkerGraph

System Properties Comparison Dgraph vs. MySQL vs. Snowflake vs. SWC-DB vs. TinkerGraph

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Distributed and scalable native Graph DBMS

Widely used open source RDBMS

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

A high performance, scalable Wide Column DBMS

A lightweight, in-memory graph engine that serves as a reference implementation of the TinkerPop3 API

Primary database model

Graph DBMS

Relational DBMS

Key/Value like access via memcached API

Relational DBMS

Wide column store

Graph DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Spatial DBMS

Time Series DBMS

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

Score	1.45
Rank	#156	Overall
	#15	Graph DBMS

Score	1083.74
Rank	#2	Overall
	#2	Relational DBMS

Score	121.33
Rank	#9	Overall
	#6	Relational DBMS

Score	0.01
Rank	#376	Overall
	#13	Wide column stores

Score	0.08
Rank	#348	Overall
	#35	Graph DBMS

Website

dgraph.io

www.mysql.com

www.snowflake.com

github.com/kashirin-alex/swc-db
www.swcdb.org

tinkerpop.apache.org/docs/current/reference/#tinkergraph-gremlin

Technical documentation

dgraph.io/docs

dev.mysql.com/doc

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

Developer

Dgraph Labs, Inc.

Oracle

since 2010, originally MySQL AB, then Sun

Snowflake Computing Inc.

Alex Kashirin

Initial release

2016

1995

2014

2020

2009

Current release

8.4.0, April 2024

0.5, April 2021

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

GPL version 2. Commercial licenses with extended functionallity are available

commercial

Open Source

GPL V3

Open Source

Apache 2.0

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.

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++

Java

Server operating systems

Linux
OS X
Windows

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

hosted

Linux

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

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

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

yes

SQL-like query language

APIs and other access methods

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

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
Proprietary native API

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

Proprietary protocol
Thrift

TinkerPop 3

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

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

C++

Groovy
Java

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

proprietary syntax

user defined functions

Triggers

yes

similar concept for controling cloud resources

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

yes

horizontal partitioning, sharding with MySQL Cluster or MySQL Fabric

yes

Sharding

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Synchronous replication via Raft

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

yes

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

none

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

not for MyISAM storage engine

yes

Relationships in graphs

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

not for MyISAM storage engine

ACID

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

optional

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

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

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.