DBMS > Amazon Neptune vs. Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Snowflake vs. YottaDB

System Properties Comparison Amazon Neptune vs. Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Snowflake vs. YottaDB

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

Cloud-based data warehousing service for structured and semi-structured data

A fast and solid embedded Key-value store

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
RDF store

Document store
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Key-value store

Secondary database models

Relational DBMS

using the Octo plugin

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	130.36
Rank	#8	Overall
	#5	Relational DBMS

Score	0.28
Rank	#306	Overall
	#44	Key-value stores

Website

aws.amazon.com/neptune

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

www.snowflake.com

yottadb.com

Technical documentation

aws.amazon.com/neptune/developer-resources

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

yottadb.com/resources/documentation

Developer

Amazon

Atos Convergence Creators

Snowflake Computing Inc.

YottaDB, LLC

Initial release

2017

2016

2014

2001

Current release

1703

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

AGPL 3.0

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

Data scheme

schema-free

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

yes

support of semi-structured data formats (JSON, XML, Avro)

schema-free

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

by using the Octo plugin

APIs and other access methods

OpenCypher
RDF 1.1 / SPARQL 1.1
TinkerPop Gremlin

LDAP

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

PostgreSQL wire protocol

using the Octo plugin
Proprietary protocol

Supported programming languages

C#
Go
Java
JavaScript
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scala

All languages with LDAP bindings

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

C
Go
JavaScript (Node.js)
Lua
M
Perl
Python
Rust

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

Triggers

yes

similar concept for controling cloud resources

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

cell division

yes

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

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

optimistic locking

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

Users with fine-grained authorization concept, user roles and pluggable authentication

Users and groups based on OS-security mechanisms

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.