DBMS > AnzoGraph DB vs. Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Microsoft Access vs. Snowflake vs. Warp 10

System Properties Comparison AnzoGraph DB vs. Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Microsoft Access vs. Snowflake vs. Warp 10

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

Microsoft Access combines a backend RDBMS (JET / ACE Engine) with a GUI frontend for data manipulation and queries.

The Access frontend is often used for accessing other datasources (DBMS, Excel, etc.)

Cloud-based data warehousing service for structured and semi-structured data

TimeSeries DBMS specialized on timestamped geo data based on LevelDB or HBase

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
RDF store

Document store
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

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	101.16
Rank	#11	Overall
	#8	Relational DBMS

Score	130.36
Rank	#8	Overall
	#5	Relational DBMS

Score	0.14
Rank	#344	Overall
	#32	Time Series DBMS

Website

cambridgesemantics.com/anzograph

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

www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/access

www.snowflake.com

www.warp10.io

Technical documentation

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

developer.microsoft.com/en-us/access

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

www.warp10.io/content/02_Getting_started

Developer

Cambridge Semantics

Atos Convergence Creators

Microsoft

Snowflake Computing Inc.

SenX

Initial release

2018

2016

1992

2014

2015

Current release

2.3, January 2021

1703

1902 (16.0.11328.20222), March 2019

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free trial version available

commercial

Bundled with Microsoft Office

commercial

Open Source

Apache License 2.0

Cloud-based only

Only available as a cloud service

yes

DBaaS offerings (sponsored links)

Database as a Service

Providers of DBaaS offerings, please contact us to be listed.

Implementation language

Java

C++

Java

Server operating systems

Linux

Windows

Not a real database server, but making use of DLLs

hosted

Linux
OS X
Windows

Data scheme

Schema-free and OWL/RDFS-schema support

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

yes

support of semi-structured data formats (JSON, XML, Avro)

schema-free

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

but not compliant to any SQL standard

yes

APIs and other access methods

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

LDAP

ADO.NET
DAO
ODBC
OLE DB

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

HTTP API
Jupyter
WebSocket

Supported programming languages

C++
Java
Python

All languages with LDAP bindings

C
C#
C++
Delphi
Java (JDBC-ODBC)
VBA
Visual Basic.NET

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions and aggregates

yes

since Access 2010 using the ACE-engine

user defined functions

yes

WarpScript

Triggers

yes

since Access 2010 using the ACE-engine

similar concept for controling cloud resources

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Automatic sharding

Sharding

cell division

none

yes

Sharding

based on HBase

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication in MPP-Cluster

yes

none

yes

selectable replication factor

based on HBase

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

based on HBase

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

ACID

but no files for transaction logging

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

but no files for transaction logging

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

a simple user-level security was built in till version Access 2003

Users with fine-grained authorization concept, user roles and pluggable authentication

Mandatory use of cryptographic tokens, containing fine-grained authorizations

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.