DBMS > Graph Engine vs. Postgres-XL vs. RavenDB vs. YottaDB

System Properties Comparison Graph Engine vs. Postgres-XL vs. RavenDB vs. YottaDB

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

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

Open Source Operational and Transactional Enterprise NoSQL Document Database

A fast and solid embedded Key-value store

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Document store

Key-value store

Secondary database models

Document store
Spatial DBMS

Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS
Time Series DBMS

Relational DBMS

using the Octo plugin

DB-Engines Ranking measures the popularity of database management systems
Trend Chart

Score	0.67
Rank	#232	Overall
	#21	Graph DBMS
	#34	Key-value stores

Score	0.53
Rank	#254	Overall
	#117	Relational DBMS

Score	2.84
Rank	#101	Overall
	#18	Document stores

Score	0.28
Rank	#306	Overall
	#44	Key-value stores

Website

Technical documentation

www.graphengine.io/docs/manual

www.postgres-xl.org/documentation

ravendb.net/docs

yottadb.com/resources/documentation

Developer

Microsoft

Hibernating Rhinos

YottaDB, LLC

Initial release

2010

2014

since 2012, originally named StormDB

2010

2001

Current release

10 R1, October 2018

5.4, July 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

MIT License

Open Source

Mozilla public license

Open Source

AGPL version 3, commercial license available

Open Source

AGPL 3.0

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.

Implementation language

.NET and C

Server operating systems

.NET

Linux
macOS

Linux
macOS
Raspberry Pi
Windows

Docker
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

XML type, but no XML query functionality

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

distributed, parallel query execution

SQL-like query language (RQL)

by using the Octo plugin

APIs and other access methods

RESTful HTTP API

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

.NET Client API
F# Client API
Go Client API
Java Client API
NodeJS Client API
PHP Client API
Python Client API
RESTful HTTP API

PostgreSQL wire protocol

using the Octo plugin
Proprietary protocol

Supported programming languages

C#
C++
F#
Visual Basic

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

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

C
Go
JavaScript (Node.js)
Lua
M
Perl
Python
Rust

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

user defined functions

yes

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

horizontal partitioning

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication

yes

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Default ACID transactions on the local node (eventually consistent across the cluster). Atomic operations with cluster-wide ACID transactions. Eventual consistency for indexes and full-text search indexes.

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

MVCC

ACID, Cluster-wide transaction available

optimistic locking

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

Authorization levels configured per client per database

Users and groups based on OS-security mechanisms

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
21 June 2016, 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 - DataScienceCentral.com
27 February 2019, Data Science Central

provided by Google News

RavenDB Launches Version 6.0 Lightning Fast Queries, Data Integrations, Corax Indexing Engine, and Sharding
3 October 2023, PR Newswire

RavenDB Welcomes David Baruc as Chief Revenue Officer: Seasoned Tech Leader to Drive Global Sales and ...
13 June 2023, PR Newswire

RavenDB Adds Graph Queries
15 May 2019, Datanami

Install the NoSQL RavenDB Data System
14 May 2021, The New Stack

Oren Eini on RavenDB, Including Consistency Guarantees and C# as the Implementation Language
23 May 2022, InfoQ.com

provided by Google News

Share this page