DBMS > Graph Engine vs. Lovefield vs. MaxDB vs. Stardog

System Properties Comparison Graph Engine vs. Lovefield vs. MaxDB vs. Stardog

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

Embeddable relational database for web apps written in pure JavaScript

A robust and reliable RDBMS optimized to run all major SAP solutions

Enterprise Knowledge Graph platform and graph DBMS with high availability, high performance reasoning, and virtualization

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Graph DBMS
RDF store

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	0.29
Rank	#293	Overall
	#133	Relational DBMS

Score	2.32
Rank	#112	Overall
	#55	Relational DBMS

Score	2.02
Rank	#123	Overall
	#11	Graph DBMS
	#6	RDF stores

Website

www.graphengine.io

google.github.io/lovefield

maxdb.sap.com

www.stardog.com

Technical documentation

www.graphengine.io/docs/manual

github.com/google/lovefield/blob/master/docs/spec_index.md

maxdb.sap.com/documentation

docs.stardog.com

Developer

Microsoft

Google

SAP, acquired from Software AG (Adabas-D) in 1997

Stardog-Union

Initial release

2010

2014

1984

2010

Current release

2.1.12, February 2017

7.9.10.12, February 2024

7.3.0, May 2020

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

MIT License

Open Source

Apache 2.0

commercial

Limited community edition free

commercial

60-day fully-featured trial license; 1-year fully-featured non-commercial use license for academics/students

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

JavaScript

C++

Java

Server operating systems

.NET

server-less, requires a JavaScript environment (browser, Node.js)

tested with Chrome, Firefox, IE, Safari

AIX
HP-UX
Linux
Solaris
Windows

Linux
macOS
Windows

Data scheme

yes

schema-free and OWL/RDFS-schema support

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.

Import/export of XML data possible

Secondary indexes

yes

supports real-time indexing in full-text and geospatial

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language

via JavaScript builder pattern

yes

Yes, compatible with all major SQL variants through dedicated BI/SQL Server

APIs and other access methods

RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
WebDAV

GraphQL query language
HTTP API
Jena RDF API
OWL
RDF4J API
Sesame REST HTTP Protocol
SNARL
SPARQL
Spring Data
Stardog Studio
TinkerPop 3

Supported programming languages

C#
C++
F#
Visual Basic

JavaScript

.Net
C#
Java
Perl
PHP
Python

.Net
Clojure
Groovy
Java
JavaScript
Python
Ruby

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

user defined functions and aggregates, HTTP Server extensions in Java

Triggers

Using read-only observers

yes

via event handlers

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

horizontal partitioning

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

Source-replica replication

Multi-source replication in HA-Cluster

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Immediate Consistency in HA-Cluster

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

relationships in graphs

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, by using IndexedDB or the cloud service Firebase Realtime Database

yes

In-memory capabilities

Is there an option to define some or all structures to be held in-memory only.

yes

using MemoryDB

yes

User concepts

Access control

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Access rights for users and roles

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

Recent citations in the news

Trinity
2 June 2023, Microsoft

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 - DataScienceCentral.com
27 February 2019, Data Science Central

provided by Google News

SAP Content Server High Availability using Amazon EFS and SUSE | Amazon Web Services
30 December 2020, AWS Blog

SAP Aligns Mainstream Maintenance Commitments Across Its Enterprise Solutions
11 August 2020, SAP News

SIOS looks to boost SAP HANA automated replication
29 March 2023, TechTarget

Remotely Exploitable Vulnerabilities in SAP Compression Algorithms
13 May 2015, Threatpost

Your SAP HANA Cheat Sheet: Milestones, Terms and More
14 May 2012, SiliconANGLE News

provided by Google News

Share this page