DBMS > gStore vs. MySQL vs. PostGIS vs. TigerGraph vs. Trafodion

System Properties Comparison gStore vs. MySQL vs. PostGIS vs. TigerGraph vs. Trafodion

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Apache Trafodion has been retired in 2021. Therefore it is excluded from the DB-Engines Ranking.

Description

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

Widely used open source RDBMS

Spatial extension of PostgreSQL

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

Transactional SQL-on-Hadoop DBMS

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
RDF store

Relational DBMS

Key/Value like access via memcached API

Spatial DBMS

Graph DBMS

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Spatial DBMS

Relational 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	1061.34
Rank	#2	Overall
	#2	Relational DBMS

Score	21.72
Rank	#29	Overall
	#1	Spatial DBMS

Score	1.80
Rank	#138	Overall
	#13	Graph DBMS

Website

Technical documentation

en.gstore.cn/#/enDocs

dev.mysql.com/doc

postgis.net/documentation

docs.tigergraph.com

trafodion.apache.org/documentation.html

Developer

Oracle

since 2010, originally MySQL AB, then Sun

Apache Software Foundation, originally developed by HP

Initial release

2016

1995

2005

2017

2014

Current release

1.2, November 2023

8.4.0, April 2024

3.4.2, February 2024

2.3.0, February 2019

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

BSD

Open Source

GPL version 2. Commercial licenses with extended functionallity are available

Open Source

GPL v2.0

commercial

Open Source

Apache 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.

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

Implementation language

C++

C and C++

C++

C++, Java

Server operating systems

Linux

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

Linux

Data scheme

schema-free and OWL/RDFS-schema support

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

with proprietary extensions

yes

SQL-like query language (GSQL)

yes

APIs and other access methods

HTTP API
SPARQL 1.1

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
Proprietary native API

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

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

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

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

C++
Java

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC/ADO.Net

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

proprietary syntax

user defined functions

yes

Java Stored Procedures

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

horizontal partitioning, sharding with MySQL Cluster or MySQL Fabric

yes

based on PostgreSQL

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

yes

based on PostgreSQL

yes, via HBase

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

via user defined functions and HBase

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

not for MyISAM storage engine

yes

Relationships in graphs

yes

Transaction concepts

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

yes

ACID

not for MyISAM storage engine

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

table locks or row locks depending on storage engine

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

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

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

no user groups or roles

yes

based on PostgreSQL

Role-based access control

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

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.