DBMS > gStore vs. Lovefield vs. MonetDB vs. Snowflake vs. Stardog

System Properties Comparison gStore vs. Lovefield vs. MonetDB vs. Snowflake vs. Stardog

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

A native Graph DBMS to store and maintain very large RDF datasets.

Embeddable relational database for web apps written in pure JavaScript

A relational database management system that stores data in columns

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

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

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
RDF store

Relational DBMS

Graph DBMS
RDF store

Secondary database models

Document store
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	0.14
Rank	#342	Overall
	#34	Graph DBMS
	#16	RDF stores

Score	0.33
Rank	#286	Overall
	#131	Relational DBMS

Score	1.72
Rank	#141	Overall
	#64	Relational DBMS

Score	130.36
Rank	#8	Overall
	#5	Relational DBMS

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

Website

en.gstore.cn

google.github.io/lovefield

www.monetdb.org

www.snowflake.com

www.stardog.com

Technical documentation

en.gstore.cn/#/enDocs

github.com/google/lovefield/blob/master/docs/spec_index.md

www.monetdb.org/Documentation

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

docs.stardog.com

Developer

Google

MonetDB BV

Snowflake Computing Inc.

Stardog-Union

Initial release

2016

2014

2004

2014

2010

Current release

1.2, November 2023

2.1.12, February 2017

Dec2023 (11.49), December 2023

7.3.0, May 2020

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

BSD

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

Mozilla Public License 2.0

commercial

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

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.

Implementation language

C++

JavaScript

Java

Server operating systems

Linux

server-less, requires a JavaScript environment (browser, Node.js)

tested with Chrome, Firefox, IE, Safari

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

hosted

Linux
macOS
Windows

Data scheme

schema-free and OWL/RDFS-schema support

yes

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

schema-free and OWL/RDFS-schema support

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

Import/export of XML data possible

Secondary indexes

yes

supports real-time indexing in full-text and geospatial

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language

via JavaScript builder pattern

yes

SQL 2003 with some extensions

yes

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

APIs and other access methods

HTTP API
SPARQL 1.1

JDBC
native C library

MAPI library (MonetDB application programming interface)
ODBC

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

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

Supported programming languages

C++
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python

JavaScript

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

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

.Net
Clojure
Groovy
Java
JavaScript
Python
Ruby

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

yes, in SQL, C, R

user defined functions

user defined functions and aggregates, HTTP Server extensions in Java

Triggers

Using read-only observers

yes

similar concept for controling cloud resources

yes

via event handlers

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding via remote tables

yes

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

Source-replica replication available in experimental status

yes

Multi-source replication in HA-Cluster

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Immediate Consistency in HA-Cluster

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

relationships in graphs

Transaction concepts

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

yes

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

yes, by using IndexedDB or the cloud service Firebase Realtime Database

yes

In-memory capabilities

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

yes

using MemoryDB

yes

User concepts

Access control

Users, roles and permissions, Role-Based Access Control (RBAC) supported

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

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

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.