Or should I say: graph/network view of the world?
To name just a few of the available graph databases:
A more extensive list: Graph Database at Wikipedia.
Asking because graph/network software popular, it may not be the best for you. Or your data.
With Facebook at 900 million users, social networks are on the tip of the tongue of just about everyone.
What if you are interested in a subset of a social network? Or a subset of characteristics in a social network? Or a “social network” with strict limits on what can appear?
Sounds like the schema for a relational database doesn’t it? Has specified properties, relationships (foreign keys), tables, etc.
Is it surprising a schema can be viewed as a network? Albeit one with predefined limits and contours?
But a schema, the relational kind, can be implemented and optimized for particular operations. Those may be operations that are of interest to you.
Or not.
You may have a need for a greater range of operations or different operations than are supported by a relational schema.
One of the NoSQL database offerings, viewed as networks, “from a certain point of view,” may be more appropriate.
Or you may need one of the graph databases I listed earlier or that you find elsewhere.
A “graph” is an abstraction onto which you can map relationships, characteristics and capabilities.
A graph/network database comes with built-in relationships, characteristics and capabilities, chosen by its implementers.
Just like relational, NoSQL, New SQL and other databases.
So, saying “graph or network” doesn’t mean your requirements are going to be met.
Comparing your requirements to assumed relationships, characteristics and capabilities is up to you.