DBMS > Graph Engine vs. RethinkDB vs. SQLite vs. SwayDB

System Properties Comparison Graph Engine vs. RethinkDB vs. SQLite vs. SwayDB

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

DBMS for the Web with a mechanism to push updated query results to applications in realtime.

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

An embeddable, non-blocking, type-safe key-value store for single or multiple disks and in-memory storage

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
Key-value store

Document store

Relational DBMS

Key-value store

Secondary database models

Spatial DBMS

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

Score	0.62
Rank	#240	Overall
	#21	Graph DBMS
	#35	Key-value stores

Score	2.84
Rank	#106	Overall
	#19	Document stores

Score	116.01
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Score	0.04
Rank	#373	Overall
	#57	Key-value stores

Website

Technical documentation

www.graphengine.io/docs/manual

rethinkdb.com/docs

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

Developer

Microsoft

The Linux Foundation

since July 2017

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Simer Plaha

Initial release

2010

2009

2000

2018

Current release

2.4.1, August 2020

3.45.3 (15 April 2024), April 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

MIT License

Open Source

Apache Version 2

Open Source

Public Domain

Open Source

GNU Affero GPL V3.0

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

C++

Scala

Server operating systems

.NET

Linux
OS X
Windows

server-less

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

yes

dynamic column types

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

string, binary, float, bool, date, geometry

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

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

APIs and other access methods

RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

Supported programming languages

C#
C++
F#
Visual Basic

community-supported driver
C#

community-supported driver
C++

community-supported driver
Clojure

community-supported driver
Dart

community-supported driver
Erlang

community-supported driver
Go

community-supported driver
Haskell

community-supported driver
Java

official driver
JavaScript (Node.js)

official driver
Lisp

community-supported driver
Lua

community-supported driver
Objective-C

community-supported driver
Perl

community-supported driver
PHP

community-supported driver
Python

official driver
Ruby

official driver
Scala

community-supported driver

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

Java
Kotlin
Scala

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Triggers

Client-side triggers through changefeeds

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

horizontal partitioning

Sharding

range based

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

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

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

Atomic single-document operations

ACID

Atomic execution of operations

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

MVCC based

yes

via file-system locks

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

users and table-level permissions

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.