DBMS > LMDB vs. RocksDB vs. TigerGraph

System Properties Comparison LMDB vs. RocksDB vs. TigerGraph

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

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

Embeddable persistent key-value store optimized for fast storage (flash and RAM)

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

Primary database model

Key-value store

Graph DBMS

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

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

Score	3.65
Rank	#85	Overall
	#11	Key-value stores

Score	1.83
Rank	#139	Overall
	#13	Graph DBMS

Website

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

rocksdb.org

www.tigergraph.com

Technical documentation

www.lmdb.tech/doc

github.com/facebook/rocksdb/wiki

docs.tigergraph.com

Developer

Symas

Facebook, Inc.

Initial release

2011

2013

2017

Current release

0.9.32, January 2024

8.11.4, April 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

BSD

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++

Server operating systems

Linux
Unix
Windows

Linux

Data scheme

schema-free

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.

Secondary indexes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language (GSQL)

APIs and other access methods

C++ API
Java API

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++
Go
Java
Perl
Python
Ruby

C++
Java

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Triggers

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

horizontal partitioning

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

yes

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

yes

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

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.