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

System Properties Comparison DuckDB vs. Graph Engine vs. Teradata 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

A hybrid cloud data analytics software platform (Teradata Vantage)

Time Series DBMS for IoT Applications

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Graph DBMS
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Time Series DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS
Time Series DBMS

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

Score	4.57
Rank	#74	Overall
	#40	Relational DBMS

Score	0.61
Rank	#240	Overall
	#21	Graph DBMS
	#35	Key-value stores

Score	45.33
Rank	#21	Overall
	#15	Relational DBMS

Website

duckdb.org

www.graphengine.io

www.teradata.com

yanza.com

Technical documentation

duckdb.org/docs

www.graphengine.io/docs/manual

docs.teradata.com

Developer

Microsoft

Teradata

Yanza

Initial release

2018

2010

1984

2015

Current release

0.10, February 2024

Teradata Vantage 1.0 MU2, January 2019

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

MIT License

Open Source

MIT License

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

hosted
Linux

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.

yes

Secondary indexes

yes

Join-index to prejoin tables, aggregate index, sparse index, hash index

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

SQL 2016 + extensions

APIs and other access methods

Arrow Database Connectivity (ADBC)
CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

RESTful HTTP API

.NET Client API
HTTP REST
JDBC
JMS Adapter
ODBC
OLE DB

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

C
C++
Cobol
Java (JDBC-ODBC)
Perl
PL/1
Python
R
Ruby

any language that supports HTTP calls

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

UDFs, stored procedures, table functions in parallel

Triggers

yes

Timer and event based

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

horizontal partitioning

Sharding

Hashing

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

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

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.

Related products and services

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

More resources

DB-Engines blog posts

Teradata is the most popular data warehouse DBMS
2 April 2013, Paul Andlinger

show all

Recent citations in the news

DuckDB: The tiny but powerful analytics database
15 May 2024, InfoWorld

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

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

Enabling Remote Query Execution through DuckDB Extensions
12 March 2024, InfoQ.com

MotherDuck Raises $52.5 Million Series B Funding as DuckDB Adoption Soars
20 September 2023, PR Newswire

provided by Google News

Trinity
2 June 2023, Microsoft

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

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

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

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

provided by Google News

Truist Financial Corp Reduces Position in Teradata Co. (NYSE:TDC)
19 May 2024, Defense World

Bear of the Day: Teradata (TDC)
17 May 2024, Yahoo Singapore News

Teradata Stockholders Approve Incentive Plan and Elect Directors - TipRanks.com
17 May 2024, TipRanks

An interview with Teradata CFO Claire Bramley
9 February 2024, McKinsey

Lakehouse dam breaks after departure of long-time Teradata CTO
1 May 2024, The Register

provided by Google News

Share this page