DBMS > Graph Engine vs. Microsoft Azure Synapse Analytics vs. Oracle Berkeley DB vs. RocksDB

System Properties Comparison Graph Engine vs. Microsoft Azure Synapse Analytics vs. Oracle Berkeley DB vs. RocksDB

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

Elastic, large scale data warehouse service leveraging the broad eco-system of SQL Server

Widely used in-process key-value store

Embeddable persistent key-value store optimized for fast storage (flash and RAM)

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Key-value store

supports sorted and unsorted key sets
Native XML DBMS

in the Oracle Berkeley DB XML version

Key-value 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	20.56
Rank	#31	Overall
	#19	Relational DBMS

Score	2.21
Rank	#117	Overall
	#20	Key-value stores
	#3	Native XML DBMS

Score	3.65
Rank	#85	Overall
	#11	Key-value stores

Website

www.graphengine.io

azure.microsoft.com/services/synapse-analytics

www.oracle.com/database/technologies/related/berkeleydb.html

rocksdb.org

Technical documentation

www.graphengine.io/docs/manual

docs.microsoft.com/azure/synapse-analytics

docs.oracle.com/cd/E17076_05/html/index.html

github.com/facebook/rocksdb/wiki

Developer

Microsoft

Oracle

originally developed by Sleepycat, which was acquired by Oracle

Facebook, Inc.

Initial release

2010

2016

1994

2013

Current release

18.1.40, May 2020

8.11.4, April 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

MIT License

commercial

Open Source

commercial license available

Open Source

BSD

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++

C, Java, C++ (depending on the Berkeley DB edition)

C++

Server operating systems

.NET

hosted

AIX
Android
FreeBSD
iOS
Linux
OS X
Solaris
VxWorks
Windows

Linux

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

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

only with the Berkeley DB XML edition

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

SQL interfaced based on SQLite is available

APIs and other access methods

RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

C++ API
Java API

Supported programming languages

C#
C++
F#
Visual Basic

C#
Java
PHP

.Net

Figaro is a .Net framework assembly that extends Berkeley DB XML into an embeddable database engine for .NET
others

Third-party libraries to manipulate Berkeley DB files are available for many languages
C
C#
C++
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)

3rd party binding
Perl
Python
Tcl

C
C++
Go
Java
Perl
Python
Ruby

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Transact SQL

Triggers

yes

only for the SQL API

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

horizontal partitioning

Sharding, horizontal partitioning

none

horizontal partitioning

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Source-replica replication

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

docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/synapse-analytics/sql-data-warehouse/sql-data-warehouse-table-constraints

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

yes

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

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.