DBMS > Graph Engine vs. Infobright vs. JaguarDB vs. Microsoft Azure SQL Database

System Properties Comparison Graph Engine vs. Infobright vs. JaguarDB vs. Microsoft Azure SQL Database

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

High performant column-oriented DBMS for analytic workloads using MySQL or PostgreSQL as a frontend

Performant, highly scalable DBMS for AI and IoT applications

Database as a Service offering with high compatibility to Microsoft SQL Server

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Key-value store
Vector DBMS

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Graph DBMS
Spatial 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	0.88
Rank	#198	Overall
	#92	Relational DBMS

Score	0.00
Rank	#385	Overall
	#61	Key-value stores
	#16	Vector DBMS

Score	72.95
Rank	#16	Overall
	#11	Relational DBMS

Website

www.graphengine.io

ignitetech.com/softwarelibrary/infobrightdb

www.jaguardb.com

azure.microsoft.com/en-us/products/azure-sql/database

Technical documentation

www.graphengine.io/docs/manual

www.jaguardb.com/support.html

docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/azure-sql

Developer

Microsoft

Ignite Technologies Inc.; formerly InfoBright Inc.

DataJaguar, Inc.

Microsoft

Initial release

2010

2005

2015

2010

Current release

3.3 July 2023

V12

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

MIT License

commercial

The open source (GPLv2) version did not support inserts/updates/deletes and was discontinued with July 2016

Open Source

GPL V3.0

commercial

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

C++

the server part. Clients available in other languages

C++

Server operating systems

.NET

Linux
Windows

Linux

hosted

Data scheme

yes

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

Secondary indexes

Knowledge Grid Technology used instead

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

A subset of ANSI SQL is implemented

but no views, foreign keys, triggers

yes

APIs and other access methods

RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

JDBC
ODBC

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

C#
C++
F#
Visual Basic

.Net
C
C#
C++
D
Eiffel
Erlang
Haskell
Java
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scheme
Tcl

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

.Net
C#
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
Ruby

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Transact SQL

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

horizontal partitioning

none

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Source-replica replication

Multi-source replication

yes, with always 3 replicas available

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

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

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

exploiting MySQL or PostgreSQL frontend capabilities

rights management via user accounts

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

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.

Related products and services

We invite representatives of vendors of related products to contact us for presenting information about their offerings here.

More resources

DB-Engines blog posts

PostgreSQL is the DBMS of the Year 2020
4 January 2021, Paul Andlinger, Matthias Gelbmann

Cloud-based DBMS's popularity grows at high rates
12 December 2019, Paul Andlinger

The popularity of cloud-based DBMSs has increased tenfold in four years
7 February 2017, Matthias Gelbmann

show all

Recent citations in the news

Trinity
30 October 2010, microsoft.com

Open source Microsoft Graph Engine takes on Neo4j
13 February 2017, InfoWorld

IBM releases Graph, a service that can outperform SQL databases
27 July 2016, GeekWire

Aerospike Is Now a Graph Database, Too
21 June 2023, Datanami

The graph analytics landscape 2019
27 February 2019, Data Science Central

provided by Google News

Public Preview: New Azure SQL Database skills introduced to Microsoft Copilot in Azure
21 May 2024, Microsoft

Public Preview: Azure SQL updates for late-May 2024
21 May 2024, Microsoft

General availability: Azure SQL updates for late-May 2024
21 May 2024, Microsoft

Getting started with delivering generative AI capabilities in SQL Server and Azure SQL
26 June 2024, microsoft.com

Copilot in Azure SQL Database in Private Preview
27 March 2024, InfoQ.com

provided by Google News

Share this page