DBMS > AnzoGraph DB vs. Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Ehcache vs. SpaceTime

System Properties Comparison AnzoGraph DB vs. Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Ehcache vs. SpaceTime

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

A widely adopted Java cache with tiered storage options

SpaceTime is a spatio-temporal DBMS with a focus on performance.

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
RDF store

Document store
Key-value store

Key-value store

Spatial DBMS

Secondary database models

Relational DBMS

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

Score	0.27
Rank	#302	Overall
	#24	Graph DBMS
	#13	RDF stores

Score	5.23
Rank	#68	Overall
	#8	Key-value stores

Score	0.00
Rank	#396	Overall
	#8	Spatial DBMS

Website

cambridgesemantics.com/anzograph

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

www.ehcache.org

www.mireo.com/spacetime

Technical documentation

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

www.ehcache.org/documentation

Developer

Cambridge Semantics

Atos Convergence Creators

Terracotta Inc, owned by Software AG

Mireo

Initial release

2018

2016

2009

2020

Current release

2.3, January 2021

1703

3.10.0, March 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free trial version available

commercial

Open Source

Apache Version 2; commercial licenses available

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

C++

Server operating systems

Linux

All OS with a Java VM

Linux

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

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

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

A subset of ANSI SQL is implemented

APIs and other access methods

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

LDAP

JCache

RESTful HTTP API

Supported programming languages

C++
Java
Python

All languages with LDAP bindings

Java

C#
C++
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions and aggregates

Triggers

yes

Cache Event Listeners

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Automatic sharding

Sharding

cell division

Sharding

by using Terracotta Server

Fixed-grid hypercubes

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication in MPP-Cluster

yes

by using Terracotta Server

Real-time block device replication (DRBD)

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

Tunable Consistency (Strong, Eventual, Weak)

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

not needed in graphs

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Atomic execution of specific operations

yes

supports JTA and can work as an XA resource

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

using a tiered cache-storage approach

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

yes

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

Jira Data Center user? Here's a critical Ehcache vulnerability to spoil your day
22 July 2021, The Register

Cache replication
19 August 2013, Packt Hub

Atlassian asks customers to patch critical Jira vulnerability
22 July 2021, BleepingComputer

Critical Jira Flaw in Atlassian Could Lead to RCE
22 July 2021, Threatpost

Migration From JBoss 5 to JBoss 7: All It Takes Is 11 Easy Steps
3 June 2021, hackernoon.com

provided by Google News

Share this page