DBMS > Graph Engine vs. RavenDB vs. SAP Advantage Database Server vs. SQLite

System Properties Comparison Graph Engine vs. RavenDB vs. SAP Advantage Database Server vs. SQLite

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

SAP Advantage Database Server seems to be discontinued. 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

Open Source Operational and Transactional Enterprise NoSQL Document Database

Low-cost RDBMS with access to ISAM and FoxPro data structures

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
Key-value store

Document store

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS
Time Series DBMS

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	2.84
Rank	#101	Overall
	#18	Document stores

Score	111.41
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Website

www.graphengine.io

ravendb.net

www.sap.com/products/advantage-database-server.html

www.sqlite.org

Technical documentation

www.graphengine.io/docs/manual

ravendb.net/docs

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

Developer

Microsoft

Hibernating Rhinos

Sybase, SAP

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Initial release

2010

1993

2000

Current release

5.4, July 2022

3.46.0 (23 May 2024), May 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

MIT License

Open Source

AGPL version 3, commercial license available

commercial

Open Source

Public Domain

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
Raspberry Pi
Windows

Linux
Windows

server-less

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

yes

dynamic column types

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

not rigid because of 'dynamic typing' concept.

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.

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language (RQL)

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

APIs and other access methods

RESTful HTTP API

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

.NET Client API
ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
OLE DB

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

Supported programming languages

C#
C++
F#
Visual Basic

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

Delphi
Perl
PHP

Actionscript
Ada
Basic
C
C#
C++
D
Delphi
Forth
Fortran
Haskell
Java
JavaScript
Lisp
Lua
MatLab
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
PL/SQL
Python
R
Ruby
Scala
Scheme
Smalltalk
Tcl

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

horizontal partitioning

Sharding

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication

CONFLICT Trigger to resolve replication conflicts
Source-replica replication

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

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.

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID, Cluster-wide transaction available

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

via file-system locks

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

caching of (temporary) tables can be configured

yes

User concepts

Access control

Authorization levels configured per client per database

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.