Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Demystifying Graph Databases: Analysis and Taxonomy of Data Organization, System Designs, and Graph Queries

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 1910.09017 v8 pith:HN3EQSIH submitted 2019-10-20 cs.DB cs.DC

classification cs.DBcs.DC
keywords graphsystemsdatadatabaseassociatedprocessingstoresanalysis
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Graph processing has become an important part of multiple areas of computer science, such as machine learning, computational sciences, medical applications, social network analysis, and many others. Numerous graphs such as web or social networks may contain up to trillions of edges. Often, these graphs are also dynamic (their structure changes over time) and have domain-specific rich data associated with vertices and edges. Graph database systems such as Neo4j enable storing, processing, and analyzing such large, evolving, and rich datasets. Due to the sheer size of such datasets, combined with the irregular nature of graph processing, these systems face unique design challenges. To facilitate the understanding of this emerging domain, we present the first survey and taxonomy of graph database systems. We focus on identifying and analyzing fundamental categories of these systems (e.g., triple stores, tuple stores, native graph database systems, or object-oriented systems), the associated graph models (e.g., RDF or Labeled Property Graph), data organization techniques (e.g., storing graph data in indexing structures or dividing data into records), and different aspects of data distribution and query execution (e.g., support for sharding and ACID). 51 graph database systems are presented and compared, including Neo4j, OrientDB, or Virtuoso. We outline graph database queries and relationships with associated domains (NoSQL stores, graph streaming, and dynamic graph algorithms). Finally, we describe research and engineering challenges to outline the future of graph databases.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Synergizing Logical Reasoning, Knowledge Management and Collaboration in Multi-Agent LLM System

    cs.MA 2025-07 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    SynergyMAS combines a graph database with a Clingo logic solver, corrective RAG, and Theory of Mind prompts in a hierarchical multi-agent team, demonstrated on a Smart Home Energy Management case study.

Pith tools