DBMS > Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. OpenEdge vs. OrigoDB vs. SAP HANA vs. TigerGraph

System Properties Comparison Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. OpenEdge vs. OrigoDB vs. SAP HANA vs. TigerGraph

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

A Wide Column Store for rapid development using massive semi-structured datasets

Application development environment with integrated database management system

A fully ACID in-memory object graph database

In-memory, column based data store. Available as appliance or cloud service

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

Primary database model

Wide column store

Relational DBMS

Document store
Object oriented DBMS

Relational DBMS

Graph DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Graph DBMS

with SAP Hana, Enterprise Edition
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	4.48
Rank	#75	Overall
	#6	Wide column stores

Score	3.51
Rank	#86	Overall
	#46	Relational DBMS

Score	0.00
Rank	#383	Overall
	#53	Document stores
	#20	Object oriented DBMS

Score	44.69
Rank	#22	Overall
	#16	Relational DBMS

Score	1.83
Rank	#139	Overall
	#13	Graph DBMS

Website

azure.microsoft.com/en-us/services/storage/tables

www.progress.com/openedge

origodb.com

www.sap.com/products/hana.html

www.tigergraph.com

Technical documentation

documentation.progress.com/output/ua/OpenEdge_latest

origodb.com/docs

help.sap.com/hana

docs.tigergraph.com

Developer

Microsoft

Progress Software Corporation

Robert Friberg et al

SAP

Initial release

2012

1984

2009

under the name LiveDB

2010

2017

Current release

OpenEdge 12.2, March 2020

2.0 SPS07 (April 4, 2023), April 2023

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

commercial

Cloud-based only

Only available as a cloud service

yes

also available as a cloud based service

DBaaS offerings (sponsored links)

Database as a Service

Providers of DBaaS offerings, please contact us to be listed.

Implementation language

C++

Server operating systems

hosted

AIX
HP-UX
Linux
Solaris
Windows

Linux
Windows

Appliance or cloud-service

Linux

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

User defined using .NET types and collections

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

can be achieved using .NET

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

close to SQL 92

yes

SQL-like query language (GSQL)

APIs and other access methods

RESTful HTTP API

JDBC
ODBC

.NET Client API
HTTP API
LINQ

JDBC
ODBC

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

Supported programming languages

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

Progress proprietary ABL (Advanced Business Language)

.Net

C++
Java

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

SQLScript, R

yes

Triggers

yes

Domain Events

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

horizontal partitioning

since Version 11.4

horizontal partitioning

client side managed; servers are not synchronized

yes

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

implicit feature of the cloud service. Replication either local, cross-facility or geo-redundant.

Source-replica replication

yes

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

depending on model

yes

Relationships in graphs

Transaction concepts

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

optimistic locking

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

Write ahead log

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

Access rights based on private key authentication or shared access signatures

Users and groups

Role based authorization

yes

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.