DBMS > 4D vs. Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Coveo vs. FatDB vs. TigerGraph

System Properties Comparison 4D vs. Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Coveo vs. FatDB vs. TigerGraph

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

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

FatDB/FatCloud has ceased operations as a company with February 2014. FatDB is discontinued and excluded from the ranking.

Description

Application development environment with integrated database management system

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

AI-powered hosted search, recommendation and personalization platform providing tools for both low-code and full-code development

A .NET NoSQL DBMS that can integrate with and extend SQL Server.

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

Search engine

Document store
Key-value 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	2.28
Rank	#114	Overall
	#11	Search engines

Score	1.83
Rank	#139	Overall
	#13	Graph DBMS

Website

www.4d.com

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

www.coveo.com

www.tigergraph.com

Technical documentation

developer.4d.com

docs.coveo.com

docs.tigergraph.com

Developer

4D, Inc

Atos Convergence Creators

Coveo

FatCloud

Initial release

1984

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

Linux

hosted

Windows

Linux

Data scheme

yes

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

hybrid - fields need to be configured prior to indexing, but relationships can be exploited at query time without pre-configuration

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

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

close to SQL 92

Via inetgration in SQL Server

SQL-like query language (GSQL)

APIs and other access methods

ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

by using 4D Mobile
SOAP webservices

LDAP

RESTful HTTP API

.NET Client API
LINQ
RESTful HTTP API
RPC
Windows WCF Bindings

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

Supported programming languages

4D proprietary IDE
PHP

All languages with LDAP bindings

C#
Java
JavaScript
Python

C++
Java

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

via applications

yes

Triggers

yes

via applications

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

cell division

yes

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication

yes

selectable replication factor

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

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

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

LDAP bind authentication

granular access controls, API key management, content filters

Can implement custom security layer via applications

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

Recent citations in the news

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

provided by Google News

Coveo Solutions Full Year 2023 Earnings: EPS Beats Expectations
24 May 2024, Yahoo Canada Shine On

Coveo Debuts GenAI Tools on Genesys Cloud and AppFoundry
17 May 2024, CX Today

Coveo Named a Leader in the 2024 Gartner® Magic Quadrant™ for Search and Product Discovery
16 May 2024, PR Newswire

Coveo expands partnership with Genesys to empower contact center agents with various types of AI
16 May 2024, KMWorld Magazine

Coveo to Showcase the Significant Impact of AI and GenAI to Improve Digital Experiences at 10th Edition of Relevance ...
21 March 2024, GlobeNewswire

provided by Google News

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

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

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

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

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

provided by Google News

Share this page