DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Blazegraph vs. H2GIS vs. Hazelcast

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Blazegraph vs. H2GIS vs. Hazelcast

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.

Spatial extension of H2

A widely adopted in-memory data grid

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Graph DBMS
RDF store

Spatial DBMS

Key-value store

Secondary database models

Relational DBMS

Document store

JSON support with IMDG 3.12

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

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

Score	0.08
Rank	#368	Overall
	#7	Spatial DBMS

Score	5.46
Rank	#61	Overall
	#7	Key-value stores

Website

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

blazegraph.com

www.h2gis.org

hazelcast.com

Technical documentation

wiki.blazegraph.com

www.h2gis.org/docs/home

hazelcast.org/imdg/docs

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

Blazegraph

CNRS

Hazelcast

Initial release

2016

2006

2013

2008

Current release

1703

2.1.5, March 2019

5.3.6, November 2023

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

extended commercial license available

Open Source

LGPL 3.0

Open Source

Apache Version 2; commercial licenses available

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

Server operating systems

Linux

Linux
OS X
Windows

All OS with a Java VM

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

schema-free

yes

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

optional

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.

yes

the object must implement a serialization strategy

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SPARQL is used as query language

yes

SQL-like query language

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

Java API
RESTful HTTP API
SPARQL QUERY
SPARQL UPDATE
TinkerPop 3

JCache
JPA
Memcached protocol
RESTful HTTP API

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

.Net
C
C++
Java
JavaScript
PHP
Python
Ruby

Java

.Net
C#
C++
Clojure
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python
Scala

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

based on H2

yes

Event Listeners, Executor Services

Triggers

yes

Events

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

Sharding

none

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

based on H2

yes

Replicated Map

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration

Immediate Consistency

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency selectable by user

Raft Consensus Algorithm

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Relationships in Graphs

yes

Transaction concepts

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

Atomic execution of specific operations

ACID

one or two-phase-commit; repeatable reads; read commited

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

yes, multi-version concurrency control (MVCC)

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)

yes

based on H2

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

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

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

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

Faster with GPUs: 5 turbocharged databases
26 September 2016, InfoWorld

provided by Google News

Hazelcast Showcases Real-Time Data Platform at 2024 Gartner Summit
15 May 2024, Datanami

Hazelcast Weaves Wider Logic Threads Through The Data Fabric
7 March 2024, Forbes

Hazelcast 5.4 real time data processing platform boosts AI and consistency
17 April 2024, VentureBeat

Hazelcast Versus Redis: A Practical Comparison
4 January 2024, Database Trends and Applications

Hazelcast: The 'true' value of streaming real-time data
27 September 2023, ComputerWeekly.com

provided by Google News

Share this page