DBMS > Graph Engine vs. HarperDB vs. Postgres-XL vs. SAP HANA

System Properties Comparison Graph Engine vs. HarperDB vs. Postgres-XL vs. SAP HANA

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

Ultra-low latency distributed database with an intuitive REST API supporting NoSQL and SQL (including joins). Deployment of functions and databases simultaneously with a consolidated node-level architecture.

Based on PostgreSQL enhanced with MPP and write-scale-out cluster features

In-memory, column based data store. Available as appliance or cloud service

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
Key-value store

Document store

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Spatial DBMS

Document store
Graph DBMS

with SAP Hana, Enterprise Edition
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	0.55
Rank	#248	Overall
	#38	Document stores

Score	0.49
Rank	#256	Overall
	#117	Relational DBMS

Score	44.69
Rank	#22	Overall
	#16	Relational DBMS

Website

www.graphengine.io

www.harperdb.io

www.postgres-xl.org

www.sap.com/products/hana.html

Technical documentation

www.graphengine.io/docs/manual

docs.harperdb.io/docs

www.postgres-xl.org/documentation

help.sap.com/hana

Developer

Microsoft

HarperDB

SAP

Initial release

2010

2017

2014

since 2012, originally named StormDB

2010

Current release

3.1, August 2021

10 R1, October 2018

2.0 SPS07 (April 4, 2023), April 2023

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

MIT License

commercial

free community edition available

Open Source

Mozilla public license

commercial

Cloud-based only

Only available as a cloud service

also available as a cloud based service

DBaaS offerings (sponsored links)

Database as a Service

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

Implementation language

.NET and C

Node.js

Server operating systems

.NET

Linux
OS X

Linux
macOS

Appliance or cloud-service

Data scheme

yes

dynamic schema

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

JSON data 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.

yes

XML type, but no XML query functionality

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like data manipulation statements

yes

distributed, parallel query execution

yes

APIs and other access methods

RESTful HTTP API

JDBC
ODBC
React Hooks
RESTful HTTP/JSON API
WebSocket

ADO.NET
JDBC
native C library
ODBC
streaming API for large objects

JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

C#
C++
F#
Visual Basic

.Net
C
C#
C++
ColdFusion
D
Dart
Delphi
Erlang
Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Lisp
MatLab
Objective C
Perl
PHP
PowerShell
Prolog
Python
R
Ruby
Rust
Scala
Swift

.Net
C
C++
Delphi
Erlang
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Perl
PHP
Python
Tcl

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Custom Functions

since release 3.1

user defined functions

SQLScript, R

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

horizontal partitioning

A table resides as a whole on one (or more) nodes in a cluster

horizontal partitioning

yes

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

the nodes on which a table resides can be defined

yes

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

Atomic execution of specific operations

ACID

MVCC

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

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, using LMDB

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 and roles

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

yes

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.