DBMS > Amazon Neptune vs. Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB vs. PlanetScale vs. SiriDB

System Properties Comparison Amazon Neptune vs. Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB vs. PlanetScale vs. SiriDB

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

Globally distributed, horizontally scalable, multi-model database service

Scalable, distributed, serverless MySQL database platform built on top of Vitess

Open Source Time Series DBMS

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
RDF store

Document store
Key-value store

Document store
Graph DBMS
Key-value store
Wide column store

Relational DBMS

Time Series DBMS

Secondary database models

Spatial DBMS

Document store
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	2.20
Rank	#119	Overall
	#9	Graph DBMS
	#5	RDF stores

Score	29.04
Rank	#27	Overall
	#4	Document stores
	#2	Graph DBMS
	#3	Key-value stores
	#3	Wide column stores

Score	1.59
Rank	#151	Overall
	#70	Relational DBMS

Score	0.00
Rank	#383	Overall
	#41	Time Series DBMS

Website

aws.amazon.com/neptune

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

azure.microsoft.com/services/cosmos-db

planetscale.com

siridb.com

Technical documentation

aws.amazon.com/neptune/developer-resources

learn.microsoft.com/azure/cosmos-db

planetscale.com/docs

docs.siridb.com

Developer

Amazon

Atos Convergence Creators

Microsoft

PlanetScale

Cesbit

Initial release

2017

2016

2014

2020

2017

Current release

1703

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

MIT License

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

Server operating systems

hosted

Linux

hosted

Docker
Linux
macOS

Linux

Data scheme

schema-free

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

optional

yes

JSON types

yes

Numeric data

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

All properties auto-indexed by default

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language

yes

with proprietary extensions

APIs and other access methods

OpenCypher
RDF 1.1 / SPARQL 1.1
TinkerPop Gremlin

LDAP

DocumentDB API
Graph API (Gremlin)
MongoDB API
RESTful HTTP API
Table API

ADO.NET
JDBC
MySQL protocol
ODBC

HTTP API

Supported programming languages

C#
Go
Java
JavaScript
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scala

All languages with LDAP bindings

.Net
C#
Java
JavaScript
JavaScript (Node.js)
MongoDB client drivers written for various programming languages
Python

Ada
C
C#
C++
D
Delphi
Eiffel
Erlang
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scheme
Tcl

C
C++
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
R

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

JavaScript

yes

proprietary syntax

Triggers

yes

JavaScript

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

cell division

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

Sharding

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

Implicit feature of the cloud service

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

yes

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

with Hadoop integration

Integration with Hadoop/HDInsight on Azure*

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration

Bounded Staleness
Consistent Prefix
Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Consistency level configurable on request level
Session Consistency

Eventual Consistency across shards
Immediate Consistency within a shard

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Relationships in graphs

yes

not for MyISAM storage engine

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Atomic execution of specific operations

Multi-item ACID transactions with snapshot isolation within a partition

ACID at shard level

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

table locks or row locks depending on storage engine

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

Access rights can be defined down to the item level

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

no user groups or roles

simple rights management via user accounts

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.