DBMS > ArcadeDB vs. BigObject vs. Blazegraph vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage

System Properties Comparison ArcadeDB vs. BigObject vs. Blazegraph vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Amazon has acquired Blazegraph's domain and (probably) product. It is said that Amazon Neptune is based on Blazegraph.

Description

Fast and scalable multi-model DBMS, originally forked from OrientDB but most of the code has been rewritten

Analytic DBMS for real-time computations and queries

High-performance graph database supporting Semantic Web (RDF/SPARQL) and Graph Database (tinkerpop3, blueprints, vertex-centric) APIs with scale-out and High Availability.

A Wide Column Store for rapid development using massive semi-structured datasets

Primary database model

Document store
Graph DBMS
Key-value store
Time Series DBMS

in next version

Relational DBMS

a hierachical model (tree) can be imposed

Graph DBMS
RDF store

Wide column store

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

Score	0.10
Rank	#358	Overall
	#48	Document stores
	#38	Graph DBMS
	#52	Key-value stores
	#35	Time Series DBMS

Score	0.19
Rank	#329	Overall
	#146	Relational DBMS

Score	0.81
Rank	#213	Overall
	#19	Graph DBMS
	#8	RDF stores

Score	4.04
Rank	#77	Overall
	#6	Wide column stores

Website

arcadedb.com

bigobject.io

blazegraph.com

azure.microsoft.com/en-us/services/storage/tables

Technical documentation

docs.arcadedb.com

docs.bigobject.io

wiki.blazegraph.com

Developer

Arcade Data

BigObject, Inc.

Blazegraph

Microsoft

Initial release

2021

2015

2006

2012

Current release

September 2021

2.1.5, March 2019

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

commercial

free community edition available

Open Source

extended commercial license available

commercial

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

Server operating systems

All OS with a Java VM

Linux

distributed as a docker-image
OS X

distributed as a docker-image (boot2docker)
Windows

distributed as a docker-image (boot2docker)

Linux
OS X
Windows

hosted

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

RDF literal types

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.

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language, no joins

SQL-like DML and DDL statements

SPARQL is used as query language

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
MongoDB API
OpenCypher
PostgreSQL wire protocol
Redis API
RESTful HTTP/JSON API
TinkerPop Gremlin

fluentd
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

Java API
RESTful HTTP API
SPARQL QUERY
SPARQL UPDATE
TinkerPop 3

RESTful HTTP API

Supported programming languages

Java

.Net
C
C++
Java
JavaScript
PHP
Python
Ruby

.Net
C#
C++
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
Ruby

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Lua

yes

Triggers

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Source-replica replication

none

yes

implicit feature of the cloud service. Replication either local, cross-facility or geo-redundant.

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

none

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

relationship in graphs

yes

automatically between fact table and dimension tables

yes

Relationships in Graphs

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

optimistic locking

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Read/write lock on objects (tables, trees)

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

Security and Authentication via Web Application Container (Tomcat, Jetty)

Access rights based on private key authentication or shared access signatures

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

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

Video: Blazegraph Accelerates Graph Computing with GPUs - High-Performance Computing News Analysis
20 December 2015, insideHPC

Harnessing GPUs Delivers a Big Speedup for Graph Analytics
15 December 2015, Datanami

This AI Paper Introduces A Comprehensive RDF Dataset With Over 26 Billion Triples Covering Scholarly Data Across All Scientific Disciplines
19 August 2023, MarkTechPost

Representation Learning on RDF* and LPG Knowledge Graphs
24 September 2020, Towards Data Science

provided by Google News

Working with Azure to Use and Manage Data Lakes
7 March 2024, Simplilearn

How to Use C# Azure.Data.Tables SDK with Azure Cosmos DB
9 July 2021, hackernoon.com

How to use Azure Table storage in .Net
14 January 2019, InfoWorld

Quick Guide to Azure Storage Pricing
16 May 2023, DevOps.com

How to write data to Azure Table Store with an Azure Function
14 April 2017, Experts Exchange

provided by Google News

Share this page