DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Graph Engine vs. MaxDB vs. Stardog

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Graph Engine vs. MaxDB vs. Stardog

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

A distributed in-memory data processing engine, underpinned by a strongly-typed RAM store and a general distributed computation engine

A robust and reliable RDBMS optimized to run all major SAP solutions

Enterprise Knowledge Graph platform and graph DBMS with high availability, high performance reasoning, and virtualization

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Graph DBMS
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Graph DBMS
RDF store

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

Score	0.61
Rank	#240	Overall
	#21	Graph DBMS
	#35	Key-value stores

Score	2.32
Rank	#112	Overall
	#55	Relational DBMS

Score	2.02
Rank	#123	Overall
	#11	Graph DBMS
	#6	RDF stores

Website

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

www.graphengine.io

maxdb.sap.com

www.stardog.com

Technical documentation

www.graphengine.io/docs/manual

maxdb.sap.com/documentation

docs.stardog.com

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

Microsoft

SAP, acquired from Software AG (Adabas-D) in 1997

Stardog-Union

Initial release

2016

2010

1984

2010

Current release

1703

7.9.10.12, February 2024

7.3.0, May 2020

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

MIT License

commercial

Limited community edition free

commercial

60-day fully-featured trial license; 1-year fully-featured non-commercial use license for academics/students

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

.NET and C

C++

Java

Server operating systems

Linux

.NET

AIX
HP-UX
Linux
Solaris
Windows

Linux
macOS
Windows

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

yes

schema-free and OWL/RDFS-schema support

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

Import/export of XML data possible

Secondary indexes

yes

supports real-time indexing in full-text and geospatial

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

Yes, compatible with all major SQL variants through dedicated BI/SQL Server

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
WebDAV

GraphQL query language
HTTP API
Jena RDF API
OWL
RDF4J API
Sesame REST HTTP Protocol
SNARL
SPARQL
Spring Data
Stardog Studio
TinkerPop 3

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

C#
C++
F#
Visual Basic

.Net
C#
Java
Perl
PHP
Python

.Net
Clojure
Groovy
Java
JavaScript
Python
Ruby

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

user defined functions and aggregates, HTTP Server extensions in Java

Triggers

yes

via event handlers

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

horizontal partitioning

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Source-replica replication

Multi-source replication in HA-Cluster

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration

Immediate Consistency

Immediate Consistency in HA-Cluster

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

relationships in graphs

Transaction concepts

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

Atomic execution of specific operations

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

optional: either by committing a write-ahead log (WAL) to the local persistent storage or by dumping the memory to a persistent storage

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

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Access rights for users and roles

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

Infographic: What makes a Mobile Operator's setup future proof?
10 February 2024, Atos

provided by Google News

Trinity
2 June 2023, Microsoft

Open source Microsoft Graph Engine takes on Neo4j
13 February 2017, InfoWorld

IBM releases Graph, a service that can outperform SQL databases
27 July 2016, GeekWire

Aerospike Is Now a Graph Database, Too
21 June 2023, Datanami

The graph analytics landscape 2019 - DataScienceCentral.com
27 February 2019, Data Science Central

provided by Google News

SAP Content Server High Availability using Amazon EFS and SUSE | Amazon Web Services
30 December 2020, AWS Blog

Extended Maintenance Commitments Across SAP Solutions
11 August 2020, SAP News

What is SAP S/4HANA?
21 March 2022, TechTarget

Alibaba Cloud Offers Access to SAP Software for Customers
5 June 2018, Alizila

Dear SAP, Why Don't You Make Hana A Success?
28 July 2021, E3-Magazin

provided by Google News

Share this page