Technical Deep Dive

Architecture Deep Dive

Understand how SynergyDB unifies relational, document, graph, vector, and time-series data in a single Rust-based engine -- routing queries from 16+ wire protocols through one optimized storage layer.

System Architecture

16+ protocol front-ends, one execution path, one storage engine. Every layer is purpose-built for multi-model operation including vector search and graph traversal.

Protocol Layer
PostgreSQL
:5432
MySQL
:3306
MongoDB
:27017
Neo4j Bolt
:7687
HTTP/REST
:8080
gRPC
:9090
Redis
:6379
+9 more
:...
Query Planner
Protocol Detection
Wire-protocol identification
Query Parsing
SQL / MQL / Cypher / RESP
Unified Query Plan
Cost-based optimization
Execution Engine
B+Tree Lookup
HNSW Vector Search
Full-Text (BM25)
Graph Traversal
Document Fetch
Storage Engine
Row Store
OLTP point lookups
Document Store
Nested docs & JSON paths
Vector Store
HNSW similarity search
Graph Store
Adjacency lists & traversals
Replication Layer
Raft Consensus
Multi-Raft per shard
CDC Streams
Unified change events
Cross-Region Sync
Configurable consistency

Protocol Translation Pipeline

From connection handshake to response serialization -- every query follows the same six-stage pipeline, regardless of protocol.

1

Connection

Your application connects using its native database driver -- psycopg2 for Python/Postgres, pymongo for MongoDB, redis-py for Redis, or any standard driver. No special SDK required.

2

Protocol Detection

SynergyDB inspects the initial handshake bytes to identify the wire protocol. PostgreSQL starts with a startup message, MongoDB with OP_MSG, Redis with RESP, and Neo4j with Bolt. Detection completes in under 50 microseconds.

3

Query Parsing

A protocol-specific parser converts the incoming query into an Abstract Query Tree (AQT). SQL is parsed with a full grammar, MQL with BSON expression evaluation, Cypher with a pattern-matching compiler, and SynergyQL with its unified GRAPH_MATCH + vector_distance() syntax.

4

Unified Query Plan

The cross-protocol optimizer analyzes the AQT, evaluates available indexes and storage formats, and produces a cost-optimal execution plan. A Postgres SELECT and a Mongo find() for the same data yield the same plan.

5

Execution

The storage engine executes the plan using the optimal access pattern -- B+Tree for point lookups, HNSW for vector similarity, Tantivy for full-text, graph adjacency for traversals. All from the same underlying LSM-tree data.

6

Response

Results are serialized back into the original wire protocol format. A Postgres client receives a RowDescription + DataRow sequence, a MongoDB client receives a BSON document, Redis gets a RESP bulk string.

Explore Each Layer

Click on any layer to reveal the engineering details beneath the surface.

Protocol Layer

Speaks 16+ native wire protocols: PostgreSQL, MySQL, MongoDB, Neo4j Bolt, Redis, Cassandra, Elasticsearch, InfluxDB, gRPC, REST, and more. Your applications connect with existing drivers -- zero changes required.

Query Planner

A cross-protocol query optimizer that understands SQL, MQL, Cypher, GraphQL, SynergyQL, and key-value semantics -- then generates a single unified execution plan.

Storage Engine

An LSM-tree storage engine with 7+ index types: B+Tree, HNSW vector, GIN inverted, full-text (Tantivy/BM25), graph adjacency, hash, and persistent B+Tree.

Replication Layer

Raft-based consensus with MVCC transactions, 4 isolation levels, deadlock detection, and distributed 2-phase commit.

One Dataset, Every Protocol

The same patient record accessed four different ways. Same data, same cluster, same millisecond-level latency -- no synchronization required.

PostgreSQL
SQL
SELECT * FROM patients WHERE id = 'P-1001';
MongoDB
MQL
db.patients.findOne({ _id: "P-1001" })
Redis
RESP
GET patient:P-1001
Neo4j (Cypher)
Cypher
MATCH (p:Patient {id: 'P-1001'})-[:HAS_VISIT]->(v) RETURN p, v
Vector Search
HNSW
SELECT * FROM patients ORDER BY vector_distance(embedding, $query, 'cosine') LIMIT 5
All four queries return the same data

Patient P-1001's record is stored once. Each protocol accesses the single source of truth through SynergyDB's unified storage engine.

SynergyDB vs. Traditional Multi-DB Stack

Running PostgreSQL + MongoDB + Neo4j + Pinecone + InfluxDB separately means 5x the operational burden. SynergyDB collapses that into one.

Infrastructure Cost
Traditional5+ servers, 5+ licenses
SynergyDB1 unified cluster
Operational Complexity
Traditional5+ backup strategies, 5+ monitoring configs
SynergyDBUnified management plane
Data Consistency
TraditionalCDC pipelines, eventual consistency
SynergyDBFull ACID across all data models
Cross-Model Queries
TraditionalApplication-level joins across databases
SynergyDBNative SynergyQL: SQL + Graph + Vector in one query
AI/Vector Search
TraditionalSeparate vector DB + sync pipeline
SynergyDBBuilt-in HNSW index with embedding API
Compliance Surface
Traditional5+ systems to audit & certify
SynergyDB1 system, 1 audit (HIPAA, SOC 2, GDPR, PCI DSS)

Performance Benchmarks

Measured on a 3-node cluster (AWS r6g.2xlarge) with 10M records. Compared against dedicated single-protocol databases on equivalent hardware.

Query Latency

End-to-End Latency

p50
Traditional
4.2 ms
SynergyDB
0.8 ms
p95
Traditional
18.6 ms
SynergyDB
2.1 ms
p99
Traditional
52.3 ms
SynergyDB
4.7 ms

Lower is better. Measured across all supported protocols.

Throughput

Queries per Second

Point reads
Traditional
48,000 qps
SynergyDB
312,000 qps
Range scans
Traditional
12,000 qps
SynergyDB
89,000 qps
Graph traversals
Traditional
8,500 qps
SynergyDB
145,000 qps

Higher is better. 64 concurrent clients per protocol.

Migration Speed

Live Migration Ingest Rate

PostgreSQL ingest
Traditional
50,000 rows/s
SynergyDB
420,000 rows/s
MongoDB ingest
Traditional
65,000 docs/s
SynergyDB
510,000 docs/s
Redis ingest
Traditional
120,000 keys/s
SynergyDB
890,000 keys/s

Higher is better. Zero-downtime live migration throughput.

Methodology: Benchmarks conducted using a standardized workload generator with reproducible configurations. Traditional stack runs each database on dedicated r6g.2xlarge instances. SynergyDB runs a 3-node cluster on equivalent total compute. All tests use the same dataset, same query patterns, and same client concurrency. Full benchmark suite and reproduction scripts available in our documentation.

Ready to simplify your data layer?

Replace your multi-database stack with a single engine that speaks every protocol your applications already use.