DBMS > EsgynDB vs. Hazelcast vs. Microsoft SQL Server vs. TigerGraph vs. TinkerGraph

System Properties Comparison EsgynDB vs. Hazelcast vs. Microsoft SQL Server vs. TigerGraph vs. TinkerGraph

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Enterprise-class SQL-on-Hadoop solution, powered by Apache Trafodion

A widely adopted in-memory data grid

Microsofts flagship relational DBMS

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

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

Primary database model

Secondary database models

Document store

JSON support with IMDG 3.12

Document store
Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	0.15
Rank	#325	Overall
	#144	Relational DBMS

Score	5.72
Rank	#59	Overall
	#6	Key-value stores

Score	807.76
Rank	#3	Overall
	#3	Relational DBMS

Score	1.44
Rank	#152	Overall
	#14	Graph DBMS

Score	0.08
Rank	#345	Overall
	#34	Graph DBMS

Website

www.esgyn.cn

hazelcast.com

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

www.tigergraph.com

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

Technical documentation

hazelcast.org/imdg/docs

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

docs.tigergraph.com

Developer

Esgyn

Hazelcast

Microsoft

Initial release

2015

2008

1989

2017

2009

Current release

5.3.6, November 2023

SQL Server 2022, November 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache Version 2; commercial licenses available

commercial

restricted free version is 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.

SQLServer Flex @ STACKIT offers a managed version of SQL Server with adjustable CPU, RAM, storage amount and speed, in enterprise grade to perfectly match all application requirements. All services are 100% GDPR-compliant.

Implementation language

C++, Java

Java

C++

Java

Server operating systems

Linux

All OS with a Java VM

Linux
Windows

Linux

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

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

the object must implement a serialization strategy

yes

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

SQL-like query language

yes

SQL-like query language (GSQL)

APIs and other access methods

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

JCache
JPA
Memcached protocol
RESTful HTTP API

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

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

TinkerPop 3

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC/ADO.Net

.Net
C#
C++
Clojure
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python
Scala

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

C++
Java

Groovy
Java

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Java Stored Procedures

yes

Event Listeners, Executor Services

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

yes

Triggers

yes

Events

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

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

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication between multi datacenters

yes

Replicated Map

yes, but depending on the SQL-Server Edition

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency selectable by user

Raft Consensus Algorithm

Immediate Consistency

none

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Relationships in graphs

yes

Relationships in graphs

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

one or two-phase-commit; repeatable reads; read commited

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

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

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Role-based access control

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Role-based access control

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.