DBMS > DuckDB vs. Graph Engine vs. RavenDB vs. Yanza

System Properties Comparison DuckDB vs. Graph Engine vs. RavenDB vs. Yanza

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Yanza seems to be discontinued. Therefore it is excluded from the DB-Engines Ranking.

Description

An embeddable, in-process, column-oriented SQL OLAP RDBMS

A distributed in-memory data processing engine, underpinned by a strongly-typed RAM store and a general distributed computation engine

Open Source Operational and Transactional Enterprise NoSQL Document Database

Time Series DBMS for IoT Applications

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Graph DBMS
Key-value store

Document store

Time Series DBMS

Secondary database models

Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS
Time Series DBMS

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

Score	4.63
Rank	#69	Overall
	#37	Relational DBMS

Score	0.67
Rank	#232	Overall
	#21	Graph DBMS
	#34	Key-value stores

Score	2.84
Rank	#101	Overall
	#18	Document stores

Website

duckdb.org

www.graphengine.io

ravendb.net

yanza.com

Technical documentation

duckdb.org/docs

www.graphengine.io/docs/manual

ravendb.net/docs

Developer

Microsoft

Hibernating Rhinos

Yanza

Initial release

2018

2010

2015

Current release

0.10, February 2024

5.4, July 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

MIT License

Open Source

MIT License

Open Source

AGPL version 3, commercial license available

commercial

free version available

Cloud-based only

Only available as a cloud service

but mainly used as a service provided by Yanza

DBaaS offerings (sponsored links)

Database as a Service

Providers of DBaaS offerings, please contact us to be listed.

Implementation language

C++

.NET and C

Server operating systems

server-less

.NET

Linux
macOS
Raspberry Pi
Windows

Windows

Data scheme

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.

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

SQL-like query language (RQL)

APIs and other access methods

Arrow Database Connectivity (ADBC)
CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

RESTful HTTP 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

HTTP API

Supported programming languages

C
C#

3rd party driver
C++
Crystal

3rd party driver
Go

3rd party driver
Java
Lisp

3rd party driver
Python
R
Ruby

3rd party driver
Rust
Swift
Zig

3rd party driver

C#
C++
F#
Visual Basic

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

any language that supports HTTP calls

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Triggers

yes

Timer and event based

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

horizontal partitioning

Sharding

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

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

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

ACID, Cluster-wide transaction available

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes, multi-version concurrency control (MVCC)

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

optional: either by committing a write-ahead log (WAL) to the local persistent storage or by dumping the memory to a persistent storage

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

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.

Related products and services

We invite representatives of vendors of related products to contact us for presenting information about their offerings here.

More resources

Recent citations in the news

DuckDB promises greater stability with 1.0 release
5 June 2024, The Register

DuckDB 1.0 Released
4 June 2024, iProgrammer

DuckDB: In-Process Python Analytics for Not-Quite-Big Data
31 May 2024, The New Stack

DuckDB Walks to the Beat of Its Own Analytics Drum
5 March 2024, Datanami

My First Billion (of Rows) in DuckDB | by João Pedro | May, 2024
1 May 2024, Towards Data Science

provided by Google News

Trinity
30 October 2010, microsoft.com

Open source Microsoft Graph Engine takes on Neo4j
13 February 2017, InfoWorld

Aerospike Is Now a Graph Database, Too
21 June 2023, Datanami

The graph analytics landscape 2019 - DataScienceCentral.com
27 February 2019, Data Science Central

IBM releases Graph, a service that can outperform SQL databases
27 July 2016, GeekWire

provided by Google News

RavenDB Launches Version 6.0 Lightning Fast Queries, Data Integrations, Corax Indexing Engine, and Sharding
3 October 2023, PR Newswire

RavenDB Welcomes David Baruc as Chief Revenue Officer: Seasoned Tech Leader to Drive Global Sales and ...
13 June 2023, PR Newswire

Install the NoSQL RavenDB Data System
14 May 2021, The New Stack

RavenDB Adds Graph Queries
15 May 2019, Datanami

Oren Eini on RavenDB, Including Consistency Guarantees and C# as the Implementation Language
23 May 2022, InfoQ.com

provided by Google News

Share this page