DBMS > FatDB vs. HugeGraph vs. Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB vs. TinkerGraph

System Properties Comparison FatDB vs. HugeGraph vs. Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB vs. TinkerGraph

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

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

Description

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

A fast-speed and highly-scalable Graph DBMS

Globally distributed, horizontally scalable, multi-model database service

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

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Graph DBMS

Document store
Graph DBMS
Key-value store
Wide column store

Graph DBMS

Secondary database models

Spatial DBMS

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

Score	0.17
Rank	#335	Overall
	#31	Graph DBMS

Score	27.71
Rank	#27	Overall
	#4	Document stores
	#2	Graph DBMS
	#3	Key-value stores
	#3	Wide column stores

Score	0.13
Rank	#345	Overall
	#35	Graph DBMS

Website

github.com/hugegraph
hugegraph.apache.org

azure.microsoft.com/services/cosmos-db

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

Technical documentation

hugegraph.apache.org/docs

learn.microsoft.com/azure/cosmos-db

Developer

FatCloud

Baidu

Microsoft

Initial release

2012

2018

2014

2009

Current release

0.9

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

commercial

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Cloud-based only

Only available as a cloud service

yes

DBaaS offerings (sponsored links)

Database as a Service

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

Implementation language

Java

Server operating systems

Windows

Linux
macOS
Unix

hosted

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

JSON types

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

also supports composite index and range index

yes

All properties auto-indexed by default

SQL

Support of SQL

Via inetgration in SQL Server

SQL-like query language

APIs and other access methods

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

Java API
RESTful HTTP API
TinkerPop Gremlin

DocumentDB API
Graph API (Gremlin)
MongoDB API
RESTful HTTP API
Table API

TinkerPop 3

Supported programming languages

Groovy
Java
Python

.Net
C#
Java
JavaScript
JavaScript (Node.js)
MongoDB client drivers written for various programming languages
Python

Groovy
Java

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

via applications

asynchronous Gremlin script jobs

JavaScript

Triggers

yes

via applications

JavaScript

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

yes

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

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

selectable replication factor

yes

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

yes

Implicit feature of the cloud service

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

via hugegraph-spark

with Hadoop integration

Integration with Hadoop/HDInsight on Azure*

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency

Bounded Staleness
Consistent Prefix
Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Consistency level configurable on request level
Session Consistency

none

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

edges in graph

yes

Relationships in graphs

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Multi-item ACID transactions with snapshot isolation within a partition

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

Can implement custom security layer via applications

Users, roles and permissions

Access rights can be defined down to the item level

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.