DBMS > AnzoGraph DB vs. Atos Standard Common Repository vs. HBase vs. Transwarp KunDB

System Properties Comparison AnzoGraph DB vs. Atos Standard Common Repository vs. HBase vs. Transwarp KunDB

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

Wide-column store based on Apache Hadoop and on concepts of BigTable

OLTP DBMS based on a distributed architecture and highly compatible with MySQL and Oracle

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
RDF store

Document store
Key-value store

Wide column store

Relational DBMS

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

Score	0.29
Rank	#303	Overall
	#25	Graph DBMS
	#14	RDF stores

Score	27.97
Rank	#26	Overall
	#2	Wide column stores

Score	0.14
Rank	#341	Overall
	#149	Relational DBMS

Website

cambridgesemantics.com/anzograph

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

hbase.apache.org

www.transwarp.cn/en/product/kundb

Technical documentation

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

hbase.apache.org/book.html

Developer

Cambridge Semantics

Atos Convergence Creators

Apache Software Foundation

Apache top-level project, originally developed by Powerset

Transwarp

Initial release

2018

2016

2008

Current release

2.3, January 2021

1703

2.3.4, January 2021

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free trial version available

commercial

Open Source

Apache version 2

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

Linux
Unix
Windows

using Cygwin

Data scheme

Schema-free and OWL/RDFS-schema support

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

schema-free, schema definition possible

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

optional

options to bring your own types, AVRO

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.

yes

APIs and other access methods

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

LDAP

Java API
RESTful HTTP API
Thrift

Supported programming languages

C++
Java
Python

All languages with LDAP bindings

C
C#
C++
Groovy
Java
PHP
Python
Scala

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions and aggregates

yes

Coprocessors in Java

yes

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Automatic sharding

Sharding

cell division

Sharding

horizontal partitioning

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication in MPP-Cluster

yes

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Kerberos/HDFS data loading

yes

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 or Eventual Consistency

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

not needed in graphs

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Atomic execution of specific operations

Single row ACID (across millions of columns)

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

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

Access rights for users and roles

LDAP bind authentication

Access Control Lists (ACL) for RBAC, integration with Apache Ranger for RBAC & ABAC

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

DB-Engines blog posts

Cloudera's HBase PaaS offering now supports Complex Transactions
11 August 2021, Krishna Maheshwari (sponsor)

Why is Hadoop not listed in the DB-Engines Ranking?
13 May 2013, Paul Andlinger

show all

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

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

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

provided by Google News

Less Components, Higher Performance: Apache Doris instead of ClickHouse, MySQL, Presto, and HBase
20 October 2023, hackernoon.com

What Is HBase?
19 August 2021, ibm.com

HBase: The database big data left behind
6 May 2016, InfoWorld

Monitor Apache HBase on Amazon EMR using Amazon Managed Service for Prometheus and Amazon Managed ...
13 February 2023, AWS Blog

HydraBase – The evolution of HBase@Facebook
5 June 2014, Facebook Engineering

provided by Google News

Share this page