DBMS > Ingres vs. JanusGraph vs. MySQL vs. Prometheus vs. Snowflake

System Properties Comparison Ingres vs. JanusGraph vs. MySQL vs. Prometheus vs. Snowflake

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Well established RDBMS

A Graph DBMS optimized for distributed clusters

It was forked from the latest code base of Titan in January 2017

Widely used open source RDBMS

Open-source Time Series DBMS and monitoring system

Cloud-based data warehousing service for structured and semi-structured data

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Graph DBMS

Relational DBMS

Key/Value like access via memcached API

Time Series DBMS

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	4.11
Rank	#81	Overall
	#44	Relational DBMS

Score	1.94
Rank	#129	Overall
	#12	Graph DBMS

Score	1083.74
Rank	#2	Overall
	#2	Relational DBMS

Score	8.42
Rank	#47	Overall
	#2	Time Series DBMS

Score	121.33
Rank	#9	Overall
	#6	Relational DBMS

Website

www.actian.com/databases/ingres

Technical documentation

docs.actian.com/ingres

docs.janusgraph.org

dev.mysql.com/doc

prometheus.io/docs

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

Developer

Actian Corporation

Linux Foundation; originally developed as Titan by Aurelius

Oracle

since 2010, originally MySQL AB, then Sun

Snowflake Computing Inc.

Initial release

1974

originally developed at University Berkely in early 1970s

2017

1995

2015

2014

Current release

11.2, May 2022

0.6.3, February 2023

8.4.0, April 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

GPL version 2. Commercial licenses with extended functionallity are available

Open Source

Apache 2.0

commercial

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.

Aiven for MySQL: Fully managed MySQL, deployable in the cloud of your choice, with seamless integrations and lightning-fast setup.

Implementation language

Java

C and C++

Server operating systems

AIX
HP Open VMS
HP-UX
Linux
Solaris
Windows

Linux
OS X
Unix
Windows

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

Linux
Windows

hosted

Data scheme

yes

support of semi-structured data formats (JSON, XML, Avro)

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

Numeric data only

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.

but tools for importing/exporting data from/to XML-files available

yes

Import of XML data possible

yes

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

with proprietary extensions

yes

APIs and other access methods

.NET Client API
JDBC
ODBC
proprietary protocol (OpenAPI)

Java API
TinkerPop Blueprints
TinkerPop Frames
TinkerPop Gremlin
TinkerPop Rexster

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
Proprietary native API

RESTful HTTP/JSON API

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

Clojure
Java
Python

Ada
C
C#
C++
D
Delphi
Eiffel
Erlang
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scheme
Tcl

.Net
C++
Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python
Ruby

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

proprietary syntax

user defined functions

Triggers

yes

similar concept for controling cloud resources

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

horizontal partitioning

Ingres Star to access multiple databases simultaneously

yes

depending on the used storage backend (e.g. Cassandra, HBase, BerkeleyDB)

horizontal partitioning, sharding with MySQL Cluster or MySQL Fabric

Sharding

yes

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Ingres Replicator

yes

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

yes

by Federation

yes

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

via Faunus, a graph analytics engine

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Immediate Consistency

none

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Relationships in graphs

yes

not for MyISAM storage engine

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

not for MyISAM storage engine

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

MVCC

yes

table locks or row locks depending on storage engine

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

Supports various storage backends: Cassandra, HBase, Berkeley DB, Akiban, Hazelcast

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

User authentification and security via Rexster Graph Server

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

no user groups or roles

Users with fine-grained authorization concept, user roles and pluggable authentication

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.