DBMS > AnzoGraph DB vs. Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Hypertable vs. NSDb

System Properties Comparison AnzoGraph DB vs. Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Hypertable vs. NSDb

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.

Hypertable has stopped its further development with March 2016 and is 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

An open source BigTable implementation based on distributed file systems such as Hadoop

Scalable, High-performance Time Series DBMS designed for Real-time Analytics on top of Kubernetes

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
RDF store

Document store
Key-value store

Wide column store

Time Series 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	0.08
Rank	#369	Overall
	#40	Time Series DBMS

Website

cambridgesemantics.com/anzograph

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

nsdb.io

Technical documentation

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

nsdb.io/Architecture

Developer

Cambridge Semantics

Atos Convergence Creators

Hypertable Inc.

Initial release

2018

2016

2009

2017

Current release

2.3, January 2021

1703

0.9.8.11, March 2016

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free trial version available

commercial

Open Source

GNU version 3. Commercial license available

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

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++

Java, Scala

Server operating systems

Linux

Linux
OS X
Windows

an inofficial Windows port is available

Linux
macOS

Data scheme

Schema-free and OWL/RDFS-schema support

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

optional

yes: int, bigint, decimal, string

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

restricted

only exact value or prefix value scans

all fields are automatically indexed

SQL

Support of SQL

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

SQL-like query language

APIs and other access methods

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

LDAP

C++ API
Thrift

gRPC
HTTP REST
WebSocket

Supported programming languages

C++
Java
Python

All languages with LDAP bindings

C++
Java
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby

Java
Scala

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions and aggregates

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Automatic sharding

Sharding

cell division

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication in MPP-Cluster

yes

selectable replication factor on file system level

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

Eventual 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

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

Using Apache Lucene

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

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

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

Comparing Graph Databases II. Part 2: ArangoDB, OrientDB, and… | by Sam Bell
20 September 2019, Towards Data Science

provided by Google News

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

provided by Google News

TimescaleDB goes distributed; implements ‘Chunking’ over ‘Sharding’ for scaling-out
22 August 2019, Packt Hub

SQL and TimescaleDB. This article takes a closer look into… | by Alibaba Cloud
31 July 2019, DataDrivenInvestor

Decorate your Windows XP with Hyperdesk
30 July 2008, CNET

The Collective: Customize Your Computer & Your Phone With Star Trek
18 March 2009, TrekMovie

NoSQL Market: A well-defined technological growth map with an impact-analysis
19 June 2020, Inter Press Service

provided by Google News

Share this page