DBMS > 4D vs. Amazon Redshift vs. Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Firebase Realtime Database vs. TigerGraph

System Properties Comparison 4D vs. Amazon Redshift vs. Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Firebase Realtime Database vs. TigerGraph

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

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

Description

Application development environment with integrated database management system

Large scale data warehouse service for use with business intelligence tools

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

Cloud-hosted realtime document store. iOS, Android, and JavaScript clients share one Realtime Database instance and automatically receive updates with the newest data.

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

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Document store
Key-value store

Document store

Graph DBMS

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

Score	2.58
Rank	#108	Overall
	#54	Relational DBMS

Score	17.94
Rank	#34	Overall
	#21	Relational DBMS

Score	14.29
Rank	#39	Overall
	#6	Document stores

Score	1.83
Rank	#139	Overall
	#13	Graph DBMS

Website

www.4d.com

aws.amazon.com/redshift

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

firebase.google.com/products/realtime-database

www.tigergraph.com

Technical documentation

developer.4d.com

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

firebase.google.com/docs/database

docs.tigergraph.com

Developer

4D, Inc

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

Atos Convergence Creators

Google

acquired by Google 2014

Initial release

1984

2012

2016

2012

2017

Current release

v20, April 2023

1703

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Cloud-based only

Only available as a cloud service

yes

DBaaS offerings (sponsored links)

Database as a Service

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

Implementation language

Java

C++

Server operating systems

OS X
Windows

hosted

Linux

hosted

Linux

Data scheme

yes

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

schema-free

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

restricted

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

close to SQL 92

yes

does not fully support an SQL-standard

SQL-like query language (GSQL)

APIs and other access methods

ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

by using 4D Mobile
SOAP webservices

JDBC
ODBC

LDAP

Android
iOS
JavaScript API
RESTful HTTP API

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

Supported programming languages

4D proprietary IDE
PHP

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

All languages with LDAP bindings

Java
JavaScript
Objective-C

C++
Java

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

user defined functions

in Python

limited functionality with using 'rules'

yes

Triggers

yes

Callbacks are triggered when data changes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

cell division

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication

yes

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration

Eventual Consistency

if the client is offline
Immediate Consistency

if the client is online

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

informational only, not enforced by the system

yes

Relationships in graphs

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Atomic execution of specific operations

yes

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

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

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

LDAP bind authentication

yes, based on authentication and database rules

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.