DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Lovefield vs. Quasardb vs. TigerGraph vs. Yaacomo

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Lovefield vs. Quasardb vs. TigerGraph vs. Yaacomo

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

This system has been discontinued and will be removed from the DB-Engines ranking.

Yaacomo seems to be discontinued and is removed from the DB-Engines ranking

Description

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

Embeddable relational database for web apps written in pure JavaScript

Distributed, high-performance timeseries database

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

OpenCL based in-memory RDBMS, designed for efficiently utilizing the hardware via parallel computing

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

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

Score	0.33
Rank	#286	Overall
	#131	Relational DBMS

Score	0.21
Rank	#322	Overall
	#29	Time Series DBMS

Score	1.80
Rank	#138	Overall
	#13	Graph DBMS

Website

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

google.github.io/lovefield

quasar.ai

www.tigergraph.com

yaacomo.com

Technical documentation

github.com/google/lovefield/blob/master/docs/spec_index.md

doc.quasar.ai/master

docs.tigergraph.com

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

Google

quasardb

Q2WEB GmbH

Initial release

2016

2014

2009

2017

2009

Current release

1703

2.1.12, February 2017

3.14.1, January 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache 2.0

commercial

Free community edition, Non-profit organizations and non-commercial usage are eligible for free licenses

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

JavaScript

C++

Server operating systems

Linux

server-less, requires a JavaScript environment (browser, Node.js)

tested with Chrome, Firefox, IE, Safari

BSD
Linux
OS X
Windows

Linux

Android
Linux
Windows

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

yes

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

optional

yes

integer and binary

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

with tags

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language

via JavaScript builder pattern

SQL-like query language

SQL-like query language (GSQL)

yes

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

HTTP API

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

JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

JavaScript

.Net
C
C#
C++
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
R

C++
Java

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Triggers

yes

Using read-only observers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

none

Sharding

consistent hashing

horizontal partitioning

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

none

Source-replica replication with selectable replication factor

Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

with Hadoop integration

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration

Immediate Consistency

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

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

yes, by using IndexedDB or the cloud service Firebase Realtime Database

yes

by using LevelDB

yes

In-memory capabilities

Is there an option to define some or all structures to be held in-memory only.

yes

using MemoryDB

yes

Transient mode

yes

User concepts

Access control

LDAP bind authentication

Cryptographically strong user authentication and audit trail

Role-based access control

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

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

Record quasar is most luminous object in the universe
20 February 2024, EarthSky

Quasar Partners with PTC to Empower IoT Customers with High-Performance Data Solutions
11 September 2023, Datanami

QUASAR yacht (Bilgin, 46.8m, 2016)
3 July 2023, Boat International

Quasar Selected by National Renewable Energy Laboratory to Help with Energy System De-risking and Optimization
6 June 2023, PR Newswire

ESO - Data Release 1: The UVES Spectral Quasar Absorption Database (SQUAD)
8 March 2019, Eso.org

provided by Google News

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

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

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

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

Aerospike takes on Neo4j and TigerGraph with launch of graph database
20 June 2023, SiliconANGLE News

provided by Google News

Share this page