DBMS > Graph Engine vs. Graphite vs. Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB vs. VictoriaMetrics

System Properties Comparison Graph Engine vs. Graphite vs. Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB vs. VictoriaMetrics

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

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

Data logging and graphing tool for time series data

The storage layer (fixed size database) is called Whisper

Globally distributed, horizontally scalable, multi-model database service

A fast, cost-effective and scalable Time Series DBMS and monitoring solution

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
Key-value store

Time Series DBMS

Document store
Graph DBMS
Key-value store
Wide column store

Time Series DBMS

Secondary database models

Spatial DBMS

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

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

Score	4.57
Rank	#73	Overall
	#5	Time Series DBMS

Score	29.04
Rank	#27	Overall
	#4	Document stores
	#2	Graph DBMS
	#3	Key-value stores
	#3	Wide column stores

Score	1.32
Rank	#162	Overall
	#14	Time Series DBMS

Website

www.graphengine.io

github.com/graphite-project/graphite-web

azure.microsoft.com/services/cosmos-db

victoriametrics.com

Technical documentation

www.graphengine.io/docs/manual

graphite.readthedocs.io

learn.microsoft.com/azure/cosmos-db

docs.victoriametrics.com
github.com/VictoriaMetrics/VictoriaMetrics/wiki

Developer

Microsoft

Chris Davis

Microsoft

VictoriaMetrics

Initial release

2010

2006

2014

2018

Current release

v1.91, May 2023

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

MIT License

Open Source

Apache 2.0

commercial

Open Source

Apache Version 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

.NET and C

Python

Server operating systems

.NET

Linux
Unix

hosted

FreeBSD
Linux
macOS
OpenBSD

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

Numeric data only

yes

JSON types

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

All properties auto-indexed by default

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language

APIs and other access methods

RESTful HTTP API

HTTP API
Sockets

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

Graphite protocol
InfluxDB Line Protocol
OpenTSDB
Prometheus Query API
Prometheus Remote Read/Write

Supported programming languages

C#
C++
F#
Visual Basic

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

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

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

JavaScript

Triggers

JavaScript

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

horizontal partitioning

none

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

yes

Implicit feature of the cloud service

Synchronous replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

with Hadoop integration

Integration with Hadoop/HDInsight on Azure*

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

none

Bounded Staleness
Consistent Prefix
Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Consistency level configurable on request level
Session Consistency

Eventual Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

Transaction concepts

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

Multi-item ACID transactions with snapshot isolation within a partition

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

locking

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

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

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.