DBMS > Amazon Neptune vs. Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Brytlyt vs. Google BigQuery

System Properties Comparison Amazon Neptune vs. Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Brytlyt vs. Google BigQuery

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

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

Description

Fast, reliable graph database built for the cloud

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

Scalable GPU-accelerated RDBMS for very fast analytic and streaming workloads, leveraging PostgreSQL

Large scale data warehouse service with append-only tables

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
RDF store

Document store
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

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

Score	2.29
Rank	#113	Overall
	#9	Graph DBMS
	#5	RDF stores

Score	0.38
Rank	#276	Overall
	#127	Relational DBMS

Score	58.10
Rank	#19	Overall
	#13	Relational DBMS

Website

aws.amazon.com/neptune

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

brytlyt.io

cloud.google.com/bigquery

Technical documentation

aws.amazon.com/neptune/developer-resources

docs.brytlyt.io

cloud.google.com/bigquery/docs

Developer

Amazon

Atos Convergence Creators

Brytlyt

Google

Initial release

2017

2016

2010

Current release

1703

5.0, August 2023

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, C++ and CUDA

Server operating systems

hosted

Linux

Linux
OS X
Windows

hosted

Data scheme

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

specific XML-type available, but no XML query functionality.

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

APIs and other access methods

OpenCypher
RDF 1.1 / SPARQL 1.1
TinkerPop Gremlin

LDAP

ADO.NET
JDBC
native C library
ODBC
streaming API for large objects

RESTful HTTP/JSON API

Supported programming languages

C#
Go
Java
JavaScript
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scala

All languages with LDAP bindings

.Net
C
C++
Delphi
Java
Perl
Python
Tcl

.Net
Java
JavaScript
Objective-C
PHP
Python
Ruby

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in PL/pgSQL

user defined functions

in JavaScript

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

cell division

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-availability zones high availability, asynchronous replication for up to 15 read replicas within a single region. Global database clusters consists of a primary write DB cluster in one region, and up to five secondary read DB clusters in different regions. Each secondary region can have up to 16 reader instances.

yes

Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Relationships in graphs

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Atomic execution of specific operations

ACID

Since BigQuery is designed for querying data

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

with encyption-at-rest

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

Access rights for users and roles can be defined via the AWS Identity and Access Management (IAM)

LDAP bind authentication

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Access privileges (owner, writer, reader) on dataset, table or view level

Google Cloud Identity & Access Management (IAM)

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.