DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Blazegraph vs. Google Cloud Datastore vs. Snowflake

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Blazegraph vs. Google Cloud Datastore vs. Snowflake

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.

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

Description

Highly scalable database system, designed for managing session and subscriber data in modern mobile communication networks

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

Automatically scaling NoSQL Database as a Service (DBaaS) on the Google Cloud Platform

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

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Graph DBMS
RDF store

Document store

Relational DBMS

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

Score	0.75
Rank	#219	Overall
	#19	Graph DBMS
	#8	RDF stores

Score	4.47
Rank	#76	Overall
	#12	Document stores

Score	121.33
Rank	#9	Overall
	#6	Relational DBMS

Website

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

blazegraph.com

cloud.google.com/datastore

www.snowflake.com

Technical documentation

wiki.blazegraph.com

cloud.google.com/datastore/docs

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

Blazegraph

Google

Snowflake Computing Inc.

Initial release

2016

2006

2008

2014

Current release

1703

2.1.5, March 2019

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

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

Linux

Linux
OS X
Windows

hosted

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

schema-free

yes

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

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

optional

yes

RDF literal types

yes, details here

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 is used as query language

SQL-like query language (GQL)

yes

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

Java API
RESTful HTTP API
SPARQL QUERY
SPARQL UPDATE
TinkerPop 3

gRPC (using protocol buffers) API
RESTful HTTP/JSON API

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

.Net
C
C++
Java
JavaScript
PHP
Python
Ruby

.Net
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
Ruby

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

using Google App Engine

user defined functions

Triggers

yes

Callbacks using the Google Apps Engine

similar concept for controling cloud resources

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

Sharding

yes

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Multi-source replication using Paxos

yes

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

using Google Cloud Dataflow

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on type of query and configuration

Strong Consistency is default for entity lookups and queries within an Entity Group (but can instead be made eventually consistent). Other queries are always eventual consistent.

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Relationships in Graphs

yes

via ReferenceProperties or Ancestor paths

yes

Transaction concepts

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

Atomic execution of specific operations

ACID

Serializable Isolation within Transactions, Read Committed outside of Transactions

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

LDAP bind authentication

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

Access rights for users, groups and roles based on Google Cloud Identity and Access Management (IAM)

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