DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. GridDB vs. searchxml vs. TigerGraph

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. GridDB vs. searchxml vs. TigerGraph

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

Scalable in-memory time series database optimized for IoT and Big Data

DBMS for structured and unstructured content wrapped with an application server

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

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Time Series DBMS

Native XML DBMS
Search engine

Graph DBMS

Secondary database models

Key-value store
Relational DBMS

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

Score	1.91
Rank	#123	Overall
	#10	Time Series DBMS

Score	0.00
Rank	#385	Overall
	#7	Native XML DBMS
	#24	Search engines

Score	1.44
Rank	#152	Overall
	#14	Graph DBMS

Website

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

griddb.net

www.searchxml.net/category/products

www.tigergraph.com

Technical documentation

docs.griddb.net

www.searchxml.net/support/handouts

docs.tigergraph.com

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

Toshiba Corporation

informationpartners gmbh

Initial release

2016

2013

2015

2017

Current release

1703

5.1, August 2022

1.0

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

AGPL version 3 and Apache License, version 2.0 , commercial license (standard and advanced editions) also available

commercial

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

C++

Server operating systems

Linux

Windows

Linux

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

yes

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

optional

yes

numerical, string, blob, geometry, boolean, timestamp

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

SQL92, SQL-like TQL (Toshiba Query Language)

SQL-like query language (GSQL)

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

JDBC
ODBC
Proprietary protocol
RESTful HTTP/JSON API

RESTful HTTP API
WebDAV
XQuery
XSLT

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

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

C
C++
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby

C++

most other programming languages supported via APIs

C++
Java

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

on the application server

yes

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

Sharding

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Source-replica replication

yes

sychronisation to multiple collections

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Connector for using GridDB as an input source and output destination for Hadoop MapReduce jobs

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration

Immediate consistency within container, eventual consistency across containers

Immediate Consistency

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 at container level

multiple readers, single writer

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

Access rights for users can be defined per database

Domain, group and role-based access control at the document level and for application services

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

Now Features Scale-Out and Scale-Up combo for Petabyte-scale Data Management
3 December 2019, global.toshiba

’s SQL Interface, Aims to Accelerate Open Innovation
17 June 2020, global.toshiba

TOSHIBA DIGITAL SOLUTIONS CORPORATION
1 November 2020, global.toshiba

IoT: Opt for the Right Open Source Database
11 August 2023, Open Source For You

Toshiba Digital Solutions collaborates with DATAFLUCT to Deliver a Machine Learning Solution that Optimizes Store Visitors Prediction ~ The integration of Cloud Data Infrastructure and Auto Machine Learning enables accurate prediction without experts inter
21 April 2021, global.toshiba

provided by Google News

TigerGraph Unveils CoPilot, Version 4.0, and New CEO
30 April 2024, Datanami

TigerGraph unveils GenAI assistant, introduces new CEO
30 April 2024, TechTarget

How TigerGraph CoPilot enables graph-augmented AI
30 April 2024, InfoWorld

graph database Archives
26 June 2024, insideBIGDATA

TigerGraph Bolsters DB for Enterprise Graph Workloads
1 November 2023, Datanami

provided by Google News

Share this page