DBMS > LMDB vs. Microsoft SQL Server vs. SAP SQL Anywhere vs. SiteWhere vs. TigerGraph

System Properties Comparison LMDB vs. Microsoft SQL Server vs. SAP SQL Anywhere vs. SiteWhere vs. TigerGraph

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

A high performant, light-weight, embedded key-value database library

Microsofts flagship relational DBMS

RDBMS database and synchronization technologies for server, desktop, remote office, and mobile environments

M2M integration platform for persisting/querying time series data

A complete, distributed, parallel graph computing platform supporting web-scale data analytics in real-time

Primary database model

Secondary database models

Document store
Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	1.99
Rank	#125	Overall
	#21	Key-value stores

Score	824.29
Rank	#3	Overall
	#3	Relational DBMS

Score	4.25
Rank	#79	Overall
	#43	Relational DBMS

Score	0.06
Rank	#356	Overall
	#35	Time Series DBMS

Score	1.83
Rank	#139	Overall
	#13	Graph DBMS

Website

www.symas.com/symas-embedded-database-lmdb

www.microsoft.com/en-us/sql-server

www.sap.com/products/technology-platform/sql-anywhere.html

github.com/sitewhere/sitewhere

www.tigergraph.com

Technical documentation

www.lmdb.tech/doc

learn.microsoft.com/en-US/sql/sql-server

help.sap.com/docs/SAP_SQL_Anywhere

sitewhere1.sitewhere.io/index.html

docs.tigergraph.com

Developer

Symas

Microsoft

SAP

formerly Sybase

SiteWhere

Initial release

2011

1989

1992

2010

2017

Current release

0.9.32, January 2024

SQL Server 2022, November 2022

17, July 2015

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

commercial

restricted free version is available

commercial

Open Source

Common Public Attribution License Version 1.0

commercial

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

C++

Java

C++

Server operating systems

Linux
Unix
Windows

Linux
Windows

AIX
HP-UX
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

Linux
OS X
Windows

Linux

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

predefined scheme

yes

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

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

SQL-like query language (GSQL)

APIs and other access methods

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
OLE DB
Tabular Data Stream (TDS)

ADO.NET
HTTP API
JDBC
ODBC

HTTP REST

GSQL (TigerGraph Query Language)
Kafka
RESTful HTTP/JSON API

Supported programming languages

.Net
C
C++
Clojure
Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Lisp
Lua
MatLab
Nim
Objective C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Rust
Swift
Tcl

C#
C++
Delphi
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Visual Basic

C
C#
C++
Delphi
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby

C++
Java

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Transact SQL, .NET languages, R, Python and (with SQL Server 2019) Java

yes, in C/C++, Java, .Net or Perl

yes

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

tables can be distributed across several files (horizontal partitioning); sharding through federation

none

Sharding

based on HBase

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

yes, but depending on the SQL-Server Edition

Source-replica replication

Database mirroring

selectable replication factor

based on HBase

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

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

Durability

Support for making data persistent

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

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

Role-based access control

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.