DBMS > AnzoGraph DB vs. Atos Standard Common Repository vs. EJDB vs. Interbase

System Properties Comparison AnzoGraph DB vs. Atos Standard Common Repository vs. EJDB vs. Interbase

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

Scalable graph database built for online analytics and data harmonization with MPP scaling, high-performance analytical algorithms and reasoning, and virtualization

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

Embeddable document-store database library with JSON representation of queries (in MongoDB style)

Light-weight proven RDBMS

originally from Borland

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
RDF store

Document store
Key-value store

Document store

Relational DBMS

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

Score	0.23
Rank	#307	Overall
	#24	Graph DBMS
	#13	RDF stores

Score	0.27
Rank	#297	Overall
	#44	Document stores

Score	4.61
Rank	#72	Overall
	#39	Relational DBMS

Website

cambridgesemantics.com/anzograph

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

github.com/Softmotions/ejdb

www.embarcadero.com/products/interbase

Technical documentation

docs.cambridgesemantics.com/anzograph/userdoc/home.htm

github.com/Softmotions/ejdb/blob/master/README.md

docs.embarcadero.com/products/interbase

Developer

Cambridge Semantics

Atos Convergence Creators

Softmotions

Embarcadero

Initial release

2018

2016

2012

1984

Current release

2.3, January 2021

1703

InterBase 2020, December 2019

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free trial version available

commercial

Open Source

GPLv2

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

Server operating systems

Linux

server-less

Android
iOS
Linux
OS X
Windows

Data scheme

Schema-free and OWL/RDFS-schema support

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

optional

yes

string, integer, double, bool, date, object_id

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

export as XML data possible

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SPARQL and SPARQL* as primary query language. Cypher preview.

yes

APIs and other access methods

Apache Mule
gRPC
JDBC
Kafka
OData access for BI tools
OpenCypher
RESTful HTTP API
SPARQL

LDAP

in-process shared library

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

C++
Java
Python

All languages with LDAP bindings

Actionscript
C
C#
C++
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Lua
Objective-C
Pike
Python
Ruby

.Net
C
C++
Delphi
Java
Object Pascal
PHP
Ruby

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions and aggregates

yes

Interbase procedure and trigger language

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Automatic sharding

Sharding

cell division

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication in MPP-Cluster

yes

none

Interbase Change Views

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Kerberos/HDFS data loading

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency in MPP-Cluster

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

not needed in graphs

typically not needed, however similar functionality with collection joins possible

yes

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 Locking

yes

Multiversion concurreny control

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

Access rights for users and roles

LDAP bind authentication

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

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

Recent citations in the news

AnzoGraph review: A graph database for deep analytics
15 April 2019, InfoWorld

Cambridge Semantics Unveils AnzoGraph DB with Geospatial Analytics
19 June 2020, Solutions Review

AnzoGraph: A W3C Standards-Based Graph Database | by Jo Stichbury
8 February 2019, Towards Data Science

Back to the future: Does graph database success hang on query language?
5 March 2018, ZDNet

Cambridge Semantics Fits AnzoGraph DB with More Speed, Free Access
23 January 2020, Solutions Review

provided by Google News

Infographic: What makes a Mobile Operator's setup future proof?
10 February 2024, Atos

provided by Google News

Borland InterBase backdoor detected | ZDNET
11 January 2001, ZDNet

Sakaja's vow to nurture sports talents in Nairobi
23 February 2024, Nairobi News

An independent soccer league transforming lives in a slum in Kenya
15 November 2022, FanSided

Johnson Sakaja Donates KSh 200k to Support Cash Strapped Football Teams From Kibera
21 February 2024, Tuko.co.ke

Malaysian e-commerce firm Lelong.my acquires local digital marketing agency Mataris Agency
29 January 2018, Yahoo Singapore News

provided by Google News

Share this page