DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. Atos Standard Common Repository vs. BigObject vs. Blazegraph

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. Atos Standard Common Repository vs. BigObject vs. Blazegraph

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.

Amazon has acquired Blazegraph's domain and (probably) product. It is said that Amazon Neptune is based on Blazegraph.

Description

Large scale data warehouse service for use with business intelligence tools

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

Analytic DBMS for real-time computations and queries

High-performance graph database supporting Semantic Web (RDF/SPARQL) and Graph Database (tinkerpop3, blueprints, vertex-centric) APIs with scale-out and High Availability.

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Document store
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

a hierachical model (tree) can be imposed

Graph DBMS
RDF store

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

Score	19.03
Rank	#34	Overall
	#21	Relational DBMS

Score	0.13
Rank	#342	Overall
	#150	Relational DBMS

Score	0.77
Rank	#222	Overall
	#20	Graph DBMS
	#8	RDF stores

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

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

bigobject.io

blazegraph.com

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

docs.bigobject.io

wiki.blazegraph.com

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

Atos Convergence Creators

BigObject, Inc.

Blazegraph

Initial release

2012

2016

2015

2006

Current release

1703

2.1.5, March 2019

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free community edition available

Open Source

extended commercial license available

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

distributed as a docker-image
OS X

distributed as a docker-image (boot2docker)
Windows

distributed as a docker-image (boot2docker)

Linux
OS X
Windows

Data scheme

yes

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

yes

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

optional

yes

RDF literal types

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

restricted

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

does not fully support an SQL-standard

SQL-like DML and DDL statements

SPARQL is used as query language

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

LDAP

fluentd
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

Java API
RESTful HTTP API
SPARQL QUERY
SPARQL UPDATE
TinkerPop 3

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

All languages with LDAP bindings

.Net
C
C++
Java
JavaScript
PHP
Python
Ruby

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

Lua

yes

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

none

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

none

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

none

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

informational only, not enforced by the system

yes

automatically between fact table and dimension tables

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

Read/write lock on objects (tables, trees)

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

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

LDAP bind authentication

Security and Authentication via Web Application Container (Tomcat, Jetty)

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.