DBMS > 4D vs. AlaSQL vs. Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Drizzle vs. TigerGraph

System Properties Comparison 4D vs. AlaSQL vs. Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Drizzle vs. TigerGraph

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

This system has been discontinued and will be removed from the DB-Engines ranking.

Drizzle has published its last release in September 2012. The open-source project is discontinued and Drizzle is excluded from the DB-Engines ranking.

Description

Application development environment with integrated database management system

JavaScript DBMS library

Highly scalable database system, designed for managing session and subscriber data in modern mobile communication networks

MySQL fork with a pluggable micro-kernel and with an emphasis of performance over compatibility.

A complete, distributed, parallel graph computing platform supporting web-scale data analytics in real-time

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Document store
Relational DBMS

Document store
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Graph DBMS

DB-Engines Ranking measures the popularity of database management systems
Trend Chart

Score	2.58
Rank	#108	Overall
	#54	Relational DBMS

Score	0.46
Rank	#260	Overall
	#40	Document stores
	#121	Relational DBMS

Score	1.83
Rank	#139	Overall
	#13	Graph DBMS

Website

www.4d.com

alasql.org

atos.net/en/convergence-creators/portfolio/standard-common-repository

www.tigergraph.com

Technical documentation

developer.4d.com

github.com/AlaSQL/alasql

docs.tigergraph.com

Developer

4D, Inc

Andrey Gershun & Mathias R. Wulff

Atos Convergence Creators

Drizzle project, originally started by Brian Aker

Initial release

1984

2014

2016

2008

2017

Current release

v20, April 2023

1703

7.2.4, September 2012

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

MIT-License

commercial

Open Source

GNU GPL

commercial

Cloud-based only

Only available as a cloud service

DBaaS offerings (sponsored links)

Database as a Service

Providers of DBaaS offerings, please contact us to be listed.

Implementation language

JavaScript

Java

C++

Server operating systems

OS X
Windows

server-less, requires a JavaScript environment (browser, Node.js)

Linux

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X

Linux

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

optional

yes

XML support

Some form of processing data in XML format, e.g. support for XML data structures, and/or support for XPath, XQuery or XSLT.

yes

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

close to SQL 92

Close to SQL99, but no user access control, stored procedures and host language bindings.

yes

with proprietary extensions

SQL-like query language (GSQL)

APIs and other access methods

ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

by using 4D Mobile
SOAP webservices

JavaScript API

LDAP

JDBC

GSQL (TigerGraph Query Language)
Kafka
RESTful HTTP/JSON API

Supported programming languages

4D proprietary IDE
PHP

JavaScript

All languages with LDAP bindings

C
C++
Java
PHP

C++
Java

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Triggers

yes

hooks for callbacks inside the server can be used.

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

cell division

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication

none

yes

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

none

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Relationships in graphs

Transaction concepts

Support to ensure data integrity after non-atomic manipulations of data

ACID

yes

only for local storage and DOM-storage

Atomic execution of specific operations

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

by using IndexedDB, SQL.JS or proprietary FileStorage

yes

In-memory capabilities

Is there an option to define some or all structures to be held in-memory only.

yes

User concepts

Access control

Users and groups

LDAP bind authentication

Pluggable authentication mechanisms

e.g. LDAP, HTTP

Role-based access control

More information provided by the system vendor

We invite representatives of system vendors to contact us for updating and extending the system information,
and for displaying vendor-provided information such as key customers, competitive advantages and market metrics.

Related products and services

We invite representatives of vendors of related products to contact us for presenting information about their offerings here.

More resources

DB-Engines blog posts

MySQL, PostgreSQL and Redis are the winners of the March ranking
2 March 2016, Paul Andlinger

show all

MySQL won the April ranking; did its forks follow?
1 April 2015, Paul Andlinger

Has MySQL finally lost its mojo?
1 July 2013, Matthias Gelbmann

show all

Recent citations in the news

Create a Marvel Database with SQL and Javascript, the easy way
2 July 2019, Towards Data Science

HarperDB - How and Why We Built It From The Ground Up on NodeJS
28 February 2021, hackernoon.com

Multi faceted data exploration in the browser using Leaflet and amCharts
3 May 2020, Towards Data Science

provided by Google News

Infographic: What makes a Mobile Operator's setup future proof?
10 February 2024, Atos

provided by Google News

TigerGraph Unveils CoPilot, Version 4.0, and New CEO
30 April 2024, Datanami

How TigerGraph CoPilot enables graph-augmented AI
30 April 2024, InfoWorld

TigerGraph unveils GenAI assistant, introduces new CEO
30 April 2024, TechTarget

Aerospike takes on Neo4j and TigerGraph with launch of graph database
20 June 2023, SiliconANGLE News

TigerGraph Bolsters DB for Enterprise Graph Workloads
1 November 2023, Datanami

provided by Google News

Share this page