DBMS > AnzoGraph DB vs. Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Linter vs. TigerGraph

System Properties Comparison AnzoGraph DB vs. Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Linter vs. TigerGraph

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

RDBMS for high security requirements

A complete, distributed, parallel graph computing platform supporting web-scale data analytics in real-time

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
RDF store

Document store
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Graph DBMS

Secondary database models

Spatial DBMS

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

Score	0.22
Rank	#302	Overall
	#24	Graph DBMS
	#13	RDF stores

Score	0.03
Rank	#368	Overall
	#156	Relational DBMS

Score	1.44
Rank	#152	Overall
	#14	Graph DBMS

Website

cambridgesemantics.com/anzograph

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

linter.ru

www.tigergraph.com

Technical documentation

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

docs.tigergraph.com

Developer

Cambridge Semantics

Atos Convergence Creators

relex.ru

Initial release

2018

2016

1990

2017

Current release

2.3, January 2021

1703

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free trial version 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 and C++

C++

Server operating systems

Linux

AIX
Android
BSD
HP Open VMS
iOS
Linux
OS X
VxWorks
Windows

Linux

Data scheme

Schema-free and OWL/RDFS-schema support

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

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.

yes

SQL-like query language (GSQL)

APIs and other access methods

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

LDAP

ADO.NET
JDBC
LINQ
ODBC
OLE DB
Oracle Call Interface (OCI)

GSQL (TigerGraph Query Language)
Kafka
RESTful HTTP/JSON API

Supported programming languages

C++
Java
Python

All languages with LDAP bindings

C
C#
C++
Java
Perl
PHP
Python
Qt
Ruby
Tcl

C++
Java

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions and aggregates

yes

proprietary syntax with the possibility to convert from PL/SQL

yes

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

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

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

not needed in graphs

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

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

Role-based access control

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: 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

AWS Launches New Analytics Engine That Combines the Power Of Vector Search And Graph Data
1 December 2023, EnterpriseAI

provided by Google News

TigerGraph Unveils CoPilot, Version 4.0, and New CEO
30 April 2024, Datanami

TigerGraph unveils GenAI assistant, introduces new CEO
30 April 2024, TechTarget

How TigerGraph CoPilot enables graph-augmented AI
30 April 2024, InfoWorld

graph database Archives
26 June 2024, insideBIGDATA

TigerGraph Bolsters DB for Enterprise Graph Workloads
1 November 2023, Datanami

provided by Google News

Share this page