DBMS > Drizzle vs. MySQL vs. TigerGraph vs. Trafodion

System Properties Comparison Drizzle vs. MySQL vs. TigerGraph vs. Trafodion

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.

Apache Trafodion has been retired in 2021. Therefore it is excluded from the DB-Engines Ranking.

Description

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

Widely used open source RDBMS

A complete, distributed, parallel graph computing platform supporting web-scale data analytics in real-time

Transactional SQL-on-Hadoop DBMS

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Key/Value like access via memcached API

Graph DBMS

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	1087.72
Rank	#2	Overall
	#2	Relational DBMS

Score	1.83
Rank	#141	Overall
	#13	Graph DBMS

Website

www.mysql.com

www.tigergraph.com

trafodion.apache.org

Technical documentation

dev.mysql.com/doc

docs.tigergraph.com

trafodion.apache.org/documentation.html

Developer

Drizzle project, originally started by Brian Aker

Oracle

since 2010, originally MySQL AB, then Sun

Apache Software Foundation, originally developed by HP

Initial release

2008

1995

2017

2014

Current release

7.2.4, September 2012

8.3.0, January 2024

2.3.0, February 2019

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

GNU GPL

Open Source

GPL version 2. Commercial licenses with extended functionallity are available

commercial

Open Source

Apache 2.0

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.

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

Implementation language

C++

C and C++

C++

C++, Java

Server operating systems

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

Linux

Data scheme

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

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

with proprietary extensions

yes

with proprietary extensions

SQL-like query language (GSQL)

yes

APIs and other access methods

JDBC

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
Proprietary native API

GSQL (TigerGraph Query Language)
Kafka
RESTful HTTP/JSON API

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

C
C++
Java
PHP

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

C++
Java

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC/ADO.Net

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

proprietary syntax

yes

Java Stored Procedures

Triggers

hooks for callbacks inside the server can be used.

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

horizontal partitioning, sharding with MySQL Cluster or MySQL Fabric

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

yes, via HBase

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

via user defined functions and HBase

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

not for MyISAM storage engine

yes

Relationships in graphs

yes

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

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

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

no user groups or roles

Role-based access control

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.