4 ms·

I'm curious on the graph database claims - how is this different to MongoDB using _from/_to attributes to represent edges? It certainly looks better than MongoD

by g0d0 10y ago

I'm curious on the graph database claims - how is this different to MongoDB using _from/_to attributes to represent edges? It certainly looks better than MongoDB in all other aspects (though to improve on MongoDB would not be difficult!). How will it get the performance of a Neo4J,Titan et al. with this model? Does it index them specially? Seems odd to ignore Gremlin and OpenCypher just to have a proprietary / "yet another standard" graph query language.

pluma 10y ago
There's a general comparison on our website: https://www.arangodb.com/why-arangodb/arangodb-vs-mongodb/ https://www.arangodb.com/why-arangodb/arangodb-vs-mongodb/ One major difference is that ArangoDB has full support of transactions across collections. Also while MongoDB now has limited graph functionality, ArangoDB is actually optimized for graph queries and can do arbitrary traversals and joins very efficiently. The problem with Gremlin/OpenCypher is that they are primarily designed as graph query languages. ArangoDB takes a multi-model approach and many ArangoDB users focus on documents first and add in graph queries as an optimization step as their products mature. AQL is designed to be very easy to learn and mixes the document and graph paradigms seamlessly, embracing the multi-model nature of the database. Personally I think that starting with a blank slate was the right choice compared to other multi-model databases that have found it necessary to extend a subset of a standard query language with their own proprietary additions to achieve the same goals.
don71 10y ago
I'm an ArangoDB team member. We did a benchmark that shows you the performance regarding Neo4J. Before you shout that it made by us have a look, please. It's all open source. The data, the scripts and so on. Everything we use for it, we described in detail. AQL is much more than a graph query language; therefore, Gremlin and OpenCypher aren't alternatives.

by g0d0 10y ago

pluma 10y ago

There's a general comparison on our website: https://www.arangodb.com/why-arangodb/arangodb-vs-mongodb/ https://www.arangodb.com/why-arangodb/arangodb-vs-mongodb/ One major difference is that ArangoDB has full support of transactions across collections. Also while MongoDB now has limited graph functionality, ArangoDB is actually optimized for graph queries and can do arbitrary traversals and joins very efficiently. The problem with Gremlin/OpenCypher is that they are primarily designed as graph query languages. ArangoDB takes a multi-model approach and many ArangoDB users focus on documents first and add in graph queries as an optimization step as their products mature. AQL is designed to be very easy to learn and mixes the document and graph paradigms seamlessly, embracing the multi-model nature of the database. Personally I think that starting with a blank slate was the right choice compared to other multi-model databases that have found it necessary to extend a subset of a standard query language with their own proprietary additions to achieve the same goals.

don71 10y ago

I'm an ArangoDB team member. We did a benchmark that shows you the performance regarding Neo4J. Before you shout that it made by us have a look, please. It's all open source. The data, the scripts and so on. Everything we use for it, we described in detail. AQL is much more than a graph query language; therefore, Gremlin and OpenCypher aren't alternatives.