DBMS > Drizzle vs. FatDB vs. HugeGraph vs. Microsoft SQL Server

System Properties Comparison Drizzle vs. FatDB vs. HugeGraph vs. Microsoft SQL Server

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Drizzle has published its last release in September 2012. The open-source project is discontinued and Drizzle is excluded from the DB-Engines ranking.

FatDB/FatCloud has ceased operations as a company with February 2014. FatDB is discontinued and excluded from the ranking.

Description

MySQL fork with a pluggable micro-kernel and with an emphasis of performance over compatibility.

A .NET NoSQL DBMS that can integrate with and extend SQL Server.

A fast-speed and highly-scalable Graph DBMS

Microsofts flagship relational DBMS

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Document store
Key-value store

Graph DBMS

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	0.15
Rank	#339	Overall
	#33	Graph DBMS

Score	829.80
Rank	#3	Overall
	#3	Relational DBMS

Website

github.com/hugegraph
hugegraph.apache.org

www.microsoft.com/en-us/sql-server

Technical documentation

hugegraph.apache.org/docs

learn.microsoft.com/en-US/sql/sql-server

Developer

Drizzle project, originally started by Brian Aker

FatCloud

Baidu

Microsoft

Initial release

2008

2012

2018

1989

Current release

7.2.4, September 2012

0.9

SQL Server 2022, November 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

GNU GPL

commercial

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

commercial

restricted free version is available

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++

Java

C++

Server operating systems

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X

Windows

Linux
macOS
Unix

Linux
Windows

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

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

also supports composite index and range index

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

with proprietary extensions

Via inetgration in SQL Server

yes

APIs and other access methods

JDBC

.NET Client API
LINQ
RESTful HTTP API
RPC
Windows WCF Bindings

Java API
RESTful HTTP API
TinkerPop Gremlin

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
OLE DB
Tabular Data Stream (TDS)

Supported programming languages

C
C++
Java
PHP

Groovy
Java
Python

C#
C++
Delphi
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Visual Basic

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

via applications

asynchronous Gremlin script jobs

Transact SQL, .NET languages, R, Python and (with SQL Server 2019) Java

Triggers

hooks for callbacks inside the server can be used.

yes

via applications

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

yes

depending on used storage backend, e.g. Cassandra and HBase

tables can be distributed across several files (horizontal partitioning); sharding through federation

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

selectable replication factor

yes

depending on used storage backend, e.g. Cassandra and HBase

yes, but depending on the SQL-Server Edition

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

via hugegraph-spark

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

edges in graph

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

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

Pluggable authentication mechanisms

e.g. LDAP, HTTP

Can implement custom security layer via applications

Users, roles and permissions

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.