DBMS > Graph Engine vs. GridDB vs. LevelDB vs. SQLite

System Properties Comparison Graph Engine vs. GridDB vs. LevelDB vs. SQLite

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

Scalable in-memory time series database optimized for IoT and Big Data

Embeddable fast key-value storage library that provides an ordered mapping from string keys to string values

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
Key-value store

Time Series DBMS

Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Key-value store
Relational DBMS

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

Score	0.56
Rank	#241	Overall
	#21	Graph DBMS
	#34	Key-value stores

Score	1.91
Rank	#123	Overall
	#10	Time Series DBMS

Score	2.33
Rank	#111	Overall
	#19	Key-value stores

Score	103.35
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Website

www.graphengine.io

griddb.net

github.com/google/leveldb

www.sqlite.org

Technical documentation

www.graphengine.io/docs/manual

docs.griddb.net

github.com/google/leveldb/blob/main/doc/index.md

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

Developer

Microsoft

Toshiba Corporation

Google

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Initial release

2010

2013

2011

2000

Current release

5.1, August 2022

1.23, February 2021

3.46.1 (13 August 2024), August 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

MIT License

Open Source

AGPL version 3 and Apache License, version 2.0 , commercial license (standard and advanced editions) also available

Open Source

BSD

Open Source

Public Domain

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.

Implementation language

.NET and C

C++

Server operating systems

.NET

Linux

Illumos
Linux
OS X
Windows

server-less

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

yes

dynamic column types

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

numerical, string, blob, geometry, boolean, timestamp

yes

not rigid because of 'dynamic typing' concept.

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

SQL92, SQL-like TQL (Toshiba Query Language)

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

APIs and other access methods

RESTful HTTP API

JDBC
ODBC
Proprietary protocol
RESTful HTTP/JSON API

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

Supported programming languages

C#
C++
F#
Visual Basic

C
C++
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby

C++
Go
Java

3rd party binding
JavaScript (Node.js)

3rd party binding
Python

3rd party binding

Actionscript
Ada
Basic
C
C#
C++
D
Delphi
Forth
Fortran
Haskell
Java
JavaScript
Lisp
Lua
MatLab
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
PL/SQL
Python
R
Ruby
Scala
Scheme
Smalltalk
Tcl

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

horizontal partitioning

Sharding

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Source-replica replication

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Connector for using GridDB as an input source and output destination for Hadoop MapReduce jobs

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate consistency within container, eventual consistency across containers

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID at container level

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

via file-system locks

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

with automatic compression on writes

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 for users can be defined 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.