DBMS > Graph Engine vs. SQLite vs. Stardog vs. Tigris

System Properties Comparison Graph Engine vs. SQLite vs. Stardog vs. Tigris

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

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

Enterprise Knowledge Graph platform and graph DBMS with high availability, high performance reasoning, and virtualization

A horizontally scalable, ACID transactional, document database available both as a fully managed cloud service and for deployment on self-managed infrastructure

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Graph DBMS
RDF store

Document store
Key-value store
Search engine
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	111.41
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Score	2.07
Rank	#122	Overall
	#11	Graph DBMS
	#6	RDF stores

Score	0.09
Rank	#363	Overall
	#49	Document stores
	#54	Key-value stores
	#22	Search engines
	#38	Time Series DBMS

Website

Technical documentation

www.graphengine.io/docs/manual

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

docs.stardog.com

www.tigrisdata.com/docs

Developer

Microsoft

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Stardog-Union

Tigris Data, Inc.

Initial release

2010

2000

2010

2022

Current release

3.46.0 (23 May 2024), May 2024

7.3.0, May 2020

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

MIT License

Open Source

Public Domain

commercial

60-day fully-featured trial license; 1-year fully-featured non-commercial use license for academics/students

Open Source

Apache Version 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.

Implementation language

.NET and C

Java

Server operating systems

.NET

server-less

Linux
macOS
Windows

Data scheme

yes

dynamic column types

schema-free and OWL/RDFS-schema support

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

not rigid because of 'dynamic typing' concept.

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.

Import/export of XML data possible

Secondary indexes

yes

supports real-time indexing in full-text and geospatial

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

Yes, compatible with all major SQL variants through dedicated BI/SQL Server

APIs and other access methods

RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

GraphQL query language
HTTP API
Jena RDF API
OWL
RDF4J API
Sesame REST HTTP Protocol
SNARL
SPARQL
Spring Data
Stardog Studio
TinkerPop 3

CLI Client
gRPC
RESTful HTTP API

Supported programming languages

C#
C++
F#
Visual Basic

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

.Net
Clojure
Groovy
Java
JavaScript
Python
Ruby

Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

user defined functions and aggregates, HTTP Server extensions in Java

Triggers

yes

via event handlers

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

horizontal partitioning

none

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

Multi-source replication in HA-Cluster

yes

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency in HA-Cluster

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

relationships in graphs

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

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

yes, using FoundationDB

In-memory capabilities

Is there an option to define some or all structures to be held in-memory only.

yes

User concepts

Access control

Access rights for users and roles

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.