I had worked on relational database; but now want to learn about graph database. I came to know that these two are graph database. What is difference between these two databases. What should we prefer among them?
One approach is to simply try to choose one database over the other. For example, you might quickly search around to find that Titan has been forked to JanusGraph where it is more actively maintained. In your research you may find that there are other open source graph databases as well like OrientDb, ChronoGraph, or Sqlg as well as commercial alternatives like Microsoft's CosmosDb, DSE Graph or IBM Graph. How do you decide now?
There is a graph framework that ties together all of these graphs including Neo4j/Titan (and more than those listed here): Apache TinkerPop. TinkerPop provides an abstraction over different graph databases and graph processors allowing the same code to be used with different configurable backends. This pattern is quite similar to the one you find in SQL with JDBC which helps make your code vendor agnostic.
You can try all of the different supported graph databases before you make a choice and you can do this type of prototyping/benchmarking fairly quickly with the Gremlin Console. You will be able to make self-informed choice as to what is the best way to go for your project.
It occurs to me as I come to the end of this post that I haven't directly answered your question. If you are just getting started and are just interested in learning about graph databases, then I likely wouldn't recommend starting with Titan/JanusGraph as it requires a bit of configuration to get started (schemas, backend selection, etc). Start with TinkerGraph or Neo4j using the Gremlin Console to try out some simple graph traversals and go from there.
Titan was originally backed by Aurelius, which was bought by DataStax in 2015. This move was designed to give DataStax a jump-start into the Graph DB world, as they now offer their own "DSE Graph" enterprise product. Titan was since been forked (as previously mentioned) into JanusGraph.
The nice thing about Titan/Janus (IMO) is that it is "pluggable" with other existing back-end and search technologies. So it will "play nice" with things like Cassandra, HBase, Hadoop, Solr, and ElasticSearch.
The drawback is that the community support is tough. The Titan project has been effectively killed, and Janus scores a whopping 0.23 on DBEngines. That makes it the 16th most-popular Graph DB (231st overall), which is pretty low.
Neo4j is backed by Neo Technology, and is regarded as the front-runner in the Graph DB community (score of 38.52 right now, 1st graph DB and 21st overall). It is open source, but controlled by Neo Technologies so they can dictate a difference in feature set between open source and enterprise.
The nice thing about Neo4j is that they have a lot of tutorials and learning aids built right-in to the Neo4j Browser, which is a nice, user-friendly web interface. Their documentation is top-notch, easy to read and search through, and they have a pretty good following here on Stack Overflow.
Neo4j Browser screenshot:
The drawback of Neo4j, is that some features (like clustering) are only available in the enterprise version. But if you work for a big company who doesn't mind shelling-out $ for an enterprise license, that may not be a big deal.
Consistency: Titan/Janus is a part of the "eventual consistency" crowd, while Neo4j aims to be strong-consistent (especially in a causal clustering scenario). Although consistency can be tuned with configuration in both, with Titan/Janus that can be dependent on your choice of pluggable backend (ex: typically strong-consistent with HBase, while eventually consistent with Cassandra).
Recommendation:
If you're just starting to learn graph databases and modeling, you can't go wrong with Neo4j. Simply download/install the community edition, run it, and execute :play movies as your first command (tutorial that walks you through loading, modeling, and querying movie relationships).
If you have some experience with graph, and you don't mind troubleshooting/googling to figure out things (like how to set the max frame size for Thrift), then you could probably do some really cool things with Titan.
Try each out, and see which one works for you.
There are far more than two graph databases - there are dozens. That being said, there are two with real market share: Neo4j and Titan/JanusGraph. But there are dozens of other graph datases, each with interesting strengths for different specific application spaces. That being said, I wouldn't dig into all of the niche players to start with - learning the basic idea of graph databases can be done with one of the two lead players.
Neo4j is the most mature, with the most nicely packaged install and documentation, tons of reference code, and support from a wide range of partners.
Titan/JanusGraph is the next most popular, as it's free/open source and has very strong support (e.g. IBM, Google, Hortonworks, AWS, ...). There's a recent complexity in that the leaders of the Titan project were acquired, freezing the Titan project. But the community forked the project into JanusGraph. So while JanusGraph is a new project, it's literally the same Titan code, with even broader industry support than Titan had.
Related to the two is the language used to work with the graphs. Neo4j uses its proprietary language, Cypher, while nearly everyone else uses Gremlin, and the TinkerPop open source tool set (which is a part of the Apache set of open source projects). Nearly all graph databases, including Neo4j, support Gremlin and TinkerPop. So, for example, you can use either Cypher or Gremlin to query Neo4j, though Neo (and some other proprietary graph database vendors) support Gremlin as a second-class citizen, so to speak. For example, you can connect to Neo using Gremlin from the (external) Gremlin console, but you can't use Gremlin in the (very nice) Neo4j console.
Note that there are many graph databases that support Gremlin other than Titan/JanusGraph. One new entrant that's very interesting is Microsoft's Azure Cosmos DB, which is a managed graph database that's "cheap and easy" if you use Azure already. And there are several vendors that provide managed JanusGraph.
For personal learningk I'd say that Neo4j is the easiest to set up and learn - you download and run it, and open a web browser onto their web-based console, which only takes a few minutes. That being said, if you're comfortable on a command line JanusGraph only took a half hour to install and get running for me, so it's not too hard.
For learning the concepts Neo4j is great. Neo4j's query language, Cypher, and JanusGraph's query language, Gremlin, are semantically identical, just spelled differently, so you'll learn the concepts either way.
For building a real system, either could work (and there are many successful following both approaches).
For which you choose, you'll want to think about whether you want to be strategically tied to a single vendor (Neo4j) or in a broader standards-based community. There's comfort level in picking the market leader with the most mature product - Neo4j. And there's a comfort level in picking open standards with strong industry support - JanusGraph. So IMO there's no "wrong" answer - people using either one are happy and successful. But since you have to pick, you'll need to think about which you're more comfortable with long-term.
Neo4j uses native graph technology.
Native graph technology ensures that data is stored efficiently by writing nodes and relationships close to each other.
It optimizes the graph DB.
With native graph technology, processing becomes faster because it uses index-free
adjancey. That means each node directly references its adjacent nodes.
Titan (Now JanusGraph) uses non-native graph technology.
In non-native we use different storage backends like Cassandra, HBase
With non-native processing becomes slowers compared to native because database uses
many types of indexs to link nodes together.
Related
I am currently building a knowledge graph for an e-commerce company, and it mainly consists of the product category hierarchies, properties, and relations among them. Besides the common relational queries, we care about the following points very much:
Master-slave cluster support. This graph database will be used for online search query processing, so high availability is crucial to us. The data volume won't be as big as millions of nodes, so we don't need a distributed cluster that can span data across multiple machines. Still, rather we may need multiple machines that can be read simultaneously, and the service won't go down even if one of the machines is offline.
Fast online query performance. Reasoning about relations can be done offline, so the performance is not that important. But we need to do a lot of online queries like "find the nodes whose property P equals to value V", so we need good performance for online query processing. This database will be read-intensive and won't be changed very much after it's initialization.
Community and documentation. Since our team is new to the field of a graph database, so we expect user-friendly documentation for deployment and development and an active community for solving problems.
Based on the requirements above, I investigated some candidates:
Neo4j. We first tried Neo4j since it's the most popular one in the field. Actually, I liked it, especially the Cypher query language. But we are about to abandon it because the community edition does not support any cluster, and currently, we don't have the budget to pay for the enterprise edition.
OrientDB. OrientDB is like the second most popular one on the market, and it seems to support cluster in its community edition. I use the word "seems" because it is not clearly stated on its website. Can anyone clear this out? Besides, I found a negative article about OrientDB which makes me hesitate: http://orientdbleaks.blogspot.jp/2015/06/the-orientdb-issues-that-made-us-give-up.html
Titan. Titan is also great, but since its original company has been acquired and its original developers are developing a different product, its future development and maintenance are in doubt.
ArangoDB. This one seems to be very fast, according to the performance report(https://www.arangodb.com/2015/10/benchmark-postgresql-mongodb-arangodb/)， but I don't know if its online query processing ability is good enough, and its support for the cluster is also unknown to me.
As for documentation and community, I really have no idea since these are the kind of things that you only get to know after you start doing it.
To sum up, based on my requirements, I think OrientDB and ArangoDB maybe my candidates, but I don't know which one to choose because of the points I stated above. Or perhaps is there any other right candidate that I'm missing?
Thanks.
Max working for ArangoDB here. ArangoDB does not only do online queries for graphs, but due to its multi-model nature you can mix graph queries with document queries (using secondary indexes), key lookups and joins. It has a sophisticated query engine with an optimizer that is fully aware of the ArangoDB cluster structure and can optimize and distribute query executions across all instances.
In a cluster, sharding, synchronous replication and self-healing are all fully automatic with configurable parameters. Deployment of an ArangoDB cluster is particularly simple (literally two clicks) on Apache Mesos or DC/OS, but is also relatively straightforward with other orchestration frameworks. ArangoDB on DC/OS additionally allows you to scale up and down via the graphical user interface or REST API calls, and failed tasks are automatically replaced.
As to the performance, all our benchmarks show a very good performance, the just released Version 3.1 even has vertex centric indexes, which is particularly important for graph queries.
We do our best to provide extensive documentation, which you find at https://www.arangodb.com/documentation/ . We have a user manual, a manual for our query language AQL as well as one for the HTTP/REST API. Furthermore, we have tutorials, frequently asked questions, a "Cookbook" for standard tasks, and we try to answer questions on StackOverflow and github issues in a timely manner.
All of this is included in the Community Edition, which is available with the Apache 2.0 open source license.
If you have more questions, do not hesitate to reach out to our team or to me personally.
OrientDB Community Edition is a free open source software, built upon by a community of developers and is constantly improving. Features such as horizontal scaling, fault tolerance, clustering, sharding and replicating aren’t disabled in OrientDB community.
For more information about cluster, take a look at the official OrientDB guide: http://orientdb.com/docs/last/Tutorial-Clusters.html
Hope it helps.
Regards
Neo4j enterprise edition can be used under the AGPL license. I am surprised a lot of people arn't aware this. If you are using Neo4j Enterprise as a server and communicating with it via REST or bolt protocol (Apache Licensed), then you don't have to worry about releasing the code of the system connecting to it under AGPL.
If you are using it embedded, then you to adhere to AGPL, but then why would you need Neo4j enterprise in that situation?
Remember to clone and compile Neo4j Enterprise from github if you plan on using it under AGPL, don't download trial.
Neo Technology gives great support and that is what you are essentially paying for for the enterprise subscription.
I am looking to dip my hands into the world of Multi-Model DBMS, I have no particular use cases, just want to start learning.
I find that there are two prominent ones - OrientDB vs ArangoDB, but was unable to find any meaningful comparison, unopinionated between them. Can someone shed some light on the difference in features between the two, and any caveats in using one over the other? If I learn one would I be able to easily transition to the other?
(I tagged FoundationDB as well, but it is proprietary and I probably won't consider it)
This question asks for a general comparison between OrientDB vs ArangoDB for someone looking to learn about Multi-model DBMS, and not an opinionated answer about which is better.
Disclaimer: I would no longer recommend OrientDB, see my comments below.
I can provide a slightly less biased opinion, having used both ArangoDB and OrientDB. It's still biased as I'm the author of OrientDB's node.js driver - oriento but I don't have a vested interest in either company or product, I've just necessarily used OrientDB more.
ArangoDB and OrientDB are both targeting a similar market and have a lot of similarities:
Both are multi-model, you can use them to store documents, graphs and simple key / values.
Both have support for Gremlin, but it's firmly a second class citizen compared to their own preferred query languages.
Both support server-side "stored procedures" in JavaScript. In both systems this comes via a slightly less than idiomatic JavaScript API, although ArangoDB's is a lot better. This is getting fixed in a forthcoming version of OrientDB.
Both offer REST APIs, both aim to be usable as an "API Server" via JavaScript request handlers. This is a lot more practical in ArangoDB than OrientDB.
Both are distributed under a permissive license.
Both are ACID and have transaction support, but in both the transactions are server-side operations - they're more like atomic batches of commands rather than the kinds of transactions you might be used to in a traditional RDBMS.
However, there are a lot of differences:
ArangoDB has no concept of "links", which are a very useful feature in OrientDB. They allow unidirectional relationships (just like a hyperlink on the web), without the overhead of edges.
ArangoDB is written in C++ (and JavaScript), whereas OrientDB is written in Java. Both have their advantages:
Being written in C++ means ArangoDB uses V8, the same high performance JavaScript engine that powers node.js and Google Chrome. Whereas being written in Java means OrientDB uses Nashorn, which is still fast but not the fastest. This means that ArangoDB can offer a greater level of compatibility with the node.js ecosystem compared to OrientDB.
Being written in Java means that OrientDB runs on more platforms, including e.g. Raspberry PI. It also means that OrientDB can leverage a lot of other technologies written in Java, e.g. OrientDB has superb full text / geospatial search support via Lucene, which is not available to ArangoDB.
OrientDB uses a dialect of SQL as its query language, whereas ArangoDB uses its own custom language called AQL. In theory, AQL is better because it's designed explicitly for the problem, in practise though it feels quite similar to SQL but with different keywords, and is yet another language to learn while OrientDB's implementation feels a lot more comfortable if you're used to SQL. SQL is declarative whereas AQL is imperative - YMMV here.
ArangoDB is a "mostly-memory" database, it works best when most of your data fits in RAM. This may or may not be suitable for your needs. OrientDB doesn't have this restriction (but also loves RAM).
OrientDB is fully object oriented - it supports classes with properties and inheritance. This is exceptionally useful because it means that your database structure can map 1-1 to your application structure, with no need for ugly hacks like ActiveRecord. ArangoDB supports something fairly similar via models in Foxx, but it's more like an optional addon rather than a core part of how the database works.
ArangoDB offers a lot of flexibility via Foxx, but it has not been designed by people with strong server-side JS backgrounds and reinvents the wheel a lot of the time. Rather than leveraging frameworks like express for their request handling, they created their own clone of Sinatra, which of course makes it almost the same as express (express is also a Sinatra clone), but subtly different, and means that none of express's middleware or plugins can be reused. Similarly, they embed V8, but not libuv, which means they do not offer the same non blocking APIs as node.js and therefore users cannot be sure about whether a given npm module will work there. This means that non trivial applications cannot use ArangoDB as a replacement for the backend, which negates a lot of the potential usefulness of Foxx.
OrientDB supports first class property level and database level indices. You can query and insert into specific indexes directly for maximum efficiency. I've not seen support for this in ArangoDB.
OrientDB is the more established option, with many high profile users. ArangoDB is newer, less well known, but growing fast.
ArangoDB's documentation is excellent, and they offer official drivers for many different programming languages. OrientDB's documentation is not quite as good, and while there are drivers for most platforms, they're community powered and therefore not always kept up to date with bleeding edge OrientDB features.
If you're using Java (or a Java bridge), you can embed OrientDB directly within your application, as a library. This use case is not possible in ArangoDB.
OrientDB has the concept of users and roles, as well as Record Level Security. This may be a killer feature for you, it is for me. It also supports token based authentication, so it's possible to use OrientDB as your primary means of authorizing/authenticating users. OrientDB also has LDAP integration. In contrast, ArangoDB support only a very simple auth option.
Both systems have their own advantages, so choosing between them comes down to your own situation:
If you're building a small application, and you're a web developer optimizing for developer productivity, it will probably be easier to get up and running quickly with ArangoDB.
If you're building a larger application, which could potentially store many gigabytes or terabytes of data, or have many thousands of concurrent users, or have "enterprise" use cases, or need fine grained security controls, OrientDB is the one for you.
If you're storing RDF or similarly structured linked data, choose OrientDB.
If you're using Java, just choose OrientDB.
Note: This is (my opinion of) the state of play today, things change quickly and I would not underestimate the ruthless efficiency of the awesome team behind ArangoDB, I just think that it's not quite there yet :)
Charles Pick (codemix.com)
I am new to graph database and try to find the right one for us but I haven't. We need something good for both updating graph and data mining.
For graph database like Neo4j we could perform queries and updates really fast. And it will perform very fast when dealing with highly connected data. But it seems not very useful to perform computations on the whole graph. That is what we need for data mining(to run pagerank for example). And GraphLab, Giraph, GraphX, Faunus etc are of this kind. But many of them are not good at like even removing and updating the graph. For example deleting vertices and edges cannot be done explicitly in GraphLab.
Is there anything good for both updating graph and pageranking?
Titan is built with both OLTP and OLAP processing in mind. It is therefore good at both high-speed read/writes at large scales:
http://thinkaurelius.com/2013/05/13/educating-the-planet-with-pearson/
http://thinkaurelius.com/2013/11/24/boutique-graph-data-with-titan/
You mentioned Faunus as something you looked at for graph analytics. Faunus is highly tuned to work with Titan. In fact, as of the most recent release of Titan at 0.5.0, Faunus has been repackaged and distributed directly with Titan as titan-hadoop for even greater integration and support.
Looking forward to Titan 1.0 due in coming months, Titan will look to support TinkerPop3, which does for OLAP what original versions did for OLTP, in that it generalizes graph analytics frameworks (it already integrates Giraph as the reference implementation).
Since you are in the exploring stage and familiar with Neo4j, I think looking at TinkerPop3 documentation would be a good start as it uses Neo4j for its reference implementation. Numerous vendors are preparing to support this latest version of TinkerPop and thus developing your application against TinkerPop, lets you get started without having to be tied to a particular graph database in this early stage. You can save that decision for later once you have more time to evaluate the different implementations available.
If you need to get to work with something right away, then start with Titan 0.5 and consider your migration path to 1.0 when it becomes available.
For a new application based on Erlang, Python, we are thinking of trying out a non-RDBMS database(just for the sake of it). Some of the databases I've researched are Mongodb, CouchDB, Cassandra, Redis, Riak, Scalaris). Here is a list of simple requirements.
Ease of development - I need to make a quick proof-of-concept demo. So the database needs to have good adapters for Eralang and Python.
I'm working on a new application where we have lots of "connected" data. Somebody recommended Neo4j for graph-like data. Any ideas on that?
Scalable - We are looking at a distributed architecture, hence scalability is important.
For the moment performance(in any form) isn't exactly on top of my list, and I don't think we'll be hitting the limitations of any of the above mentioned databases anytime soon.
I'm just looking for a starting point for non-RDBMS database. Any recommendations?
We have used Mnesia in building an Enterprise Application. Mnesia when in a mode where the tables are Fragmented performs at its best because it would not have table size limits. Mnesia has performed well for the last 1 year and is still on. We have around 15 million records per table on the average and around 24 tables in a given database Schema.
I recommend mnesia Database especially the one that comes shipped within Erlang 14B03 at the Erlang.org website. We have used CouchDB and Membase Server (http://www.couchbase.com)for some parts of the system but mnesia is the main data storage (primary storage). Backups have been automated very well and the system scales well against increasing size of data yet tables running under many checkpoints. Its distribution, auto-replication and Complex Data Model enabled us to build the application very quickly without worrying about replication, scalability and fail-over / take-over of systems.
Mnesia Scales well and it's schema can be configured and changes while the database is running. Tables can be moved, copied, altered e.t.c while the system is live. Generally, it has all features of powerful systems built on top of Erlang/OTP. When you google mnesia DBMS, you will get a number of books and papers that will tell you more.
Most importantly, our application is Web based, powered by Yaws web server (yaws.hyber.org) and we are impressed with Mnesia's performance. Its record look up speeds are very good and the system feels so light yet renders alot of data. Do give mnesia a try and you will not regret it.
EDIT: To quickly use it in your application, look at the answer given here
Ease of development - I need to make a quick proof-of-concept demo. So the database needs to have good adapters for Eralang and Python.
Riak is written in Erlang => speaks Erlang natively
I'm working on a new application where we have lots of "connected" data. Somebody recommended Neo4j for graph-like data. Any ideas on that?
Neo4j is great for "connected" data. It has Python bindings, and some Erlang adapters How to Use Neo4j From Erlang. Thing to note, Neo4j is not as easy to Scale Out, at least for free. But.. it is fully transactional ( even JTA ), it persists things to disk, it is baked into Spring Data.
Scalable - We are looking at a distributed architecture, hence scalability is important.
For the moment performance(in any form) isn't exactly on top of my list, and I don't think we'll be hitting the limitations of any of the above mentioned databases anytime soon.
I believe given your input, Riak would be the best choice for you:
Written in Erlang
Naturally Distributed
Very easy to develop for/with
Lots of features ( secondary indicies, virtual nodes, fully modular, pluggable persistence [LevelDB, Bitcask, InnoDB, flat file, etc.. ], extremely reliable, built in full text search, etc.. )
Has an extremely passionate and helpful community with Basho backing it up
With the rising of non-sql database usage in high traffic website, I'm interested to use it for my project. Now I've heard several names like Voldermort, MongoDB and CouchDB. But which are among these NonSQL database that is production ready? I've seen the download pages and it seems that none of them is production ready because is not version 1.0 yet. Is there any other names other than these 3 that is recommendable to be used in production?
What do you mean by production ready? As far as I know, all of them are being used on live systems.
You should make your choice based on how the features they provide fit your needs.
You can also add Tokyo Cabinet to the list as well as the mnesia database provided by the Erlang VM.
I think you need to start out from your project requirements to see what kind of database you really need. There are many non-relational DBMS:s out there and they differ a lot in what kind of problems they are good at solving. I think the article Should you go Beyond Relational Databases? by Martin Kleppmann is a good starting point for finding out what you need. There's also a lot of stackoverflow threads on similar topics, these are my favorites:
The Next-gen Databases
Non-Relational Database Design
When shouldn’t you use a relational
database?
Good reasons NOT to use a relational
database?
When you have narrowed down what you actually need you can take a deeper look into the alternatives to see which DBMS are production ready for your use case. Production readiness isn't a yes/no thing: people may successfully deploy some solution that for example lacks in tool support - in another project this could be a no-go.
As for version numbers different projects have a different take on this, so you can't just compare the version numbers. I'm involved in the graph database project Neo4j and even if it has been in production use for 5+ years by now we still haven't released a version 1.0 final yet.
I'm tempted to answer "use SIRA_PRISE".
It's definitely non-SQL.
And its current version is 1.2, meaning that someone like you must definitely assume it's "production-ready".
But perhaps I shouldn't be answering at all.
Nice article comparing rdbms with 'next gen' and listing some providers:
Is the Relational Database Doomed?
http://readwrite.com/2009/02/12/is-the-relational-database-doomed
I will suggest you to use Arangodb.
ArangoDB is a multi-model mostly-memory database with a flexible data model for documents and graphs. It is designed as a “general purpose database”, offering all the features you typically need for modern web applications.
ArangoDB is supposed to grow with the application—the project may start as a simple single-server prototype, nothing you couldn’t do with a relational database equally well. After some time, some geo-location features are needed and a shopping cart requires transactions. ArangoDB’s graph data model is useful for the recommendation system. The smartphone app needs a lean API to the back-end—this is where Foxx, ArangoDB’s integrated Javascript application framework, comes into play.
Another unique feature is ArangoDB’s query language AQL — it makes querying powerful and convenient. AQL enables you to describe complex filter conditions and joins in a readable format, much in the same way as SQL.
You can model your data in several ways:
in key/value pairs
as collections of documents
as graphs with nodes, edges, and properties for both
You can access data in ArangoDB:
using the general HTTP REST API via curl/wget, or your browser
via the ArangoDB shell (“arangosh”)
using a programming language specific client library
Server requirements for ArangoDB:
ArangoDB runs on Linux, OS X and Microsoft Windows.
It runs on 32bit and 64bit systems, though using a 32bit system will limit you to using only approximately 2 to 3 GB of data with ArangoDB.