DBMS > 4D vs. Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Sphinx vs. STSdb vs. TigerGraph

System Properties Comparison 4D vs. Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Sphinx vs. STSdb 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

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

Open source search engine for searching in data from different sources, e.g. relational databases

Key-Value Store with special method for indexing

optimized for high performance using a special indexing method

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

Key-value store

Graph DBMS

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

Score	2.68
Rank	#110	Overall
	#54	Relational DBMS

Score	6.03
Rank	#60	Overall
	#6	Search engines

Score	0.06
Rank	#365	Overall
	#55	Key-value stores

Score	1.83
Rank	#141	Overall
	#13	Graph DBMS

Website

www.4d.com

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

sphinxsearch.com

github.com/STSSoft/STSdb4

www.tigergraph.com

Technical documentation

developer.4d.com

sphinxsearch.com/docs

docs.tigergraph.com

Developer

4D, Inc

Atos Convergence Creators

Sphinx Technologies Inc.

STS Soft SC

Initial release

1984

2016

2001

2011

2017

Current release

v20, April 2023

1703

3.5.1, February 2023

4.0.8, September 2015

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

GPL version 2, commercial licence available

Open Source

GPLv2, commercial license available

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

Java

C++

Server operating systems

OS X
Windows

Linux

FreeBSD
Linux
NetBSD
OS X
Solaris
Windows

Windows

Linux

Data scheme

yes

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

optional

yes

primitive types and user defined types (classes)

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

full-text index on all search fields

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

close to SQL 92

SQL-like query language (SphinxQL)

SQL-like query language (GSQL)

APIs and other access methods

ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

by using 4D Mobile
SOAP webservices

LDAP

Proprietary protocol

.NET Client API

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

Supported programming languages

4D proprietary IDE
PHP

All languages with LDAP bindings

C++

unofficial client library
Java
Perl

unofficial client library
PHP
Python
Ruby

unofficial client library

C#
Java

C++
Java

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

cell division

Sharding

Partitioning is done manually, search queries against distributed index is supported

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication

yes

none

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

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

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

The original contents of fields are not stored in the Sphinx index.

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

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

The DB-Engines ranking includes now search engines
4 February 2013, Paul Andlinger

show all

Recent citations in the news

Switching From Sphinx to MkDocs Documentation — What Did I Gain and Lose
2 February 2024, Towards Data Science

Manticore is a Faster Alternative to Elasticsearch in C++
25 July 2022, hackernoon.com

Perplexity AI: From Its Use To Operation, Everything You Need To Know About Googles Newest Challenger
11 January 2024, Free Press Journal

The Pirate Bay was recently down for over a week due to a DDoS attack
29 October 2019, The Hacker News

How to Build 600+ Links in One Month
4 September 2020, Search Engine Journal

provided by Google News

New TigerGraph CEO Refocuses Efforts on Enterprise Customers
31 July 2023, Datanami

TigerGraph update adds enterprise-scale capabilities
31 October 2023, TechTarget

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

TigerGraph partners with Pascal as master distributor for APJ region
10 January 2024, VnExpress International

provided by Google News

Share this page