DBMS > Graph Engine vs. Lovefield vs. MySQL vs. Trafodion

System Properties Comparison Graph Engine vs. Lovefield vs. MySQL vs. Trafodion

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Apache Trafodion has been retired in 2021. Therefore it is excluded from the DB-Engines Ranking.

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

Widely used open source RDBMS

Transactional SQL-on-Hadoop DBMS

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Key/Value like access via memcached API

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
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	0.29
Rank	#293	Overall
	#133	Relational DBMS

Score	1083.74
Rank	#2	Overall
	#2	Relational DBMS

Website

www.graphengine.io

google.github.io/lovefield

www.mysql.com

trafodion.apache.org

Technical documentation

www.graphengine.io/docs/manual

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

dev.mysql.com/doc

trafodion.apache.org/documentation.html

Developer

Microsoft

Google

Oracle

since 2010, originally MySQL AB, then Sun

Apache Software Foundation, originally developed by HP

Initial release

2010

2014

1995

2014

Current release

2.1.12, February 2017

8.4.0, April 2024

2.3.0, February 2019

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

MIT License

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

GPL version 2. Commercial licenses with extended functionallity are available

Open Source

Apache 2.0

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.

Aiven for MySQL: Fully managed MySQL, deployable in the cloud of your choice, with seamless integrations and lightning-fast setup.

Implementation language

.NET and C

JavaScript

C and C++

C++, Java

Server operating systems

.NET

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

tested with Chrome, Firefox, IE, Safari

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

Linux

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

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language

via JavaScript builder pattern

yes

with proprietary extensions

yes

APIs and other access methods

RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
Proprietary native API

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

C#
C++
F#
Visual Basic

JavaScript

Ada
C
C#
C++
D
Delphi
Eiffel
Erlang
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scheme
Tcl

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC/ADO.Net

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

proprietary syntax

Java Stored Procedures

Triggers

Using read-only observers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

horizontal partitioning

none

horizontal partitioning, sharding with MySQL Cluster or MySQL Fabric

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

yes, via HBase

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

via user defined functions and HBase

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

not for MyISAM storage engine

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

not for MyISAM storage engine

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

table locks or row locks depending on storage engine

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

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

no user groups or roles

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.