DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Google BigQuery vs. TigerGraph vs. TinkerGraph

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Google BigQuery vs. TigerGraph vs. TinkerGraph

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

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

Large scale data warehouse service with append-only tables

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

A lightweight, in-memory graph engine that serves as a reference implementation of the TinkerPop3 API

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Graph DBMS

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

Score	60.38
Rank	#19	Overall
	#13	Relational DBMS

Score	1.83
Rank	#139	Overall
	#13	Graph DBMS

Score	0.08
Rank	#348	Overall
	#35	Graph DBMS

Website

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

cloud.google.com/bigquery

www.tigergraph.com

tinkerpop.apache.org/docs/current/reference/#tinkergraph-gremlin

Technical documentation

cloud.google.com/bigquery/docs

docs.tigergraph.com

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

Google

Initial release

2016

2010

2017

2009

Current release

1703

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache 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

hosted

Linux

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

yes

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

yes

SQL-like query language (GSQL)

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

RESTful HTTP/JSON API

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

TinkerPop 3

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

.Net
Java
JavaScript
Objective-C
PHP
Python
Ruby

C++
Java

Groovy
Java

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in JavaScript

yes

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

none

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

none

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Relationships in graphs

yes

Relationships in graphs

Transaction concepts

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

Atomic execution of specific operations

Since BigQuery is designed for querying data

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

optional

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

Access privileges (owner, writer, reader) on dataset, table or view level

Google Cloud Identity & Access Management (IAM)

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.