DBMS > Apache Drill vs. Atos Standard Common Repository vs. OrigoDB vs. Snowflake vs. SpatiaLite

System Properties Comparison Apache Drill vs. Atos Standard Common Repository vs. OrigoDB vs. Snowflake vs. SpatiaLite

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

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

Description

Schema-free SQL Query Engine for Hadoop, NoSQL and Cloud Storage

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

A fully ACID in-memory object graph database

Cloud-based data warehousing service for structured and semi-structured data

Spatial extension of SQLite

Primary database model

Document store
Relational DBMS

Document store
Key-value store

Document store
Object oriented DBMS

Relational DBMS

Spatial DBMS

Secondary database models

Relational DBMS

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

Score	1.90
Rank	#126	Overall
	#23	Document stores
	#60	Relational DBMS

Score	0.00
Rank	#385	Overall
	#54	Document stores
	#21	Object oriented DBMS

Score	133.72
Rank	#7	Overall
	#5	Relational DBMS

Score	1.56
Rank	#142	Overall
	#3	Spatial DBMS

Website

drill.apache.org

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

origodb.com

www.snowflake.com

www.gaia-gis.it/fossil/libspatialite/index

Technical documentation

drill.apache.org/docs

origodb.com/docs

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

www.gaia-gis.it/gaia-sins/spatialite_topics.html

Developer

Apache Software Foundation

Atos Convergence Creators

Robert Friberg et al

Snowflake Computing Inc.

Alessandro Furieri

Initial release

2012

2016

2009

under the name LiveDB

2014

2008

Current release

1.20.3, January 2023

1703

5.0.0, August 2020

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache Version 2

commercial

Open Source

commercial

Open Source

MPL 1.1, GPL v2.0 or LGPL v2.1

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++

Server operating systems

Linux
OS X
Windows

Linux

Linux
Windows

hosted

server-less

Data scheme

schema-free

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

yes

support of semi-structured data formats (JSON, XML, Avro)

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

optional

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

yes

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL SELECT statement is SQL:2003 compliant

yes

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

LDAP

.NET Client API
HTTP API
LINQ

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

C++

All languages with LDAP bindings

.Net

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

yes

user defined functions

Triggers

yes

Domain Events

similar concept for controling cloud resources

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

horizontal partitioning

client side managed; servers are not synchronized

yes

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Source-replica replication

yes

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

none

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

depending on model

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

Depending on the underlying data source

yes

Write ahead log

yes

In-memory capabilities

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

Depending on the underlying data source

yes

User concepts

Access control

Depending on the underlying data source

LDAP bind authentication

Role based authorization

Users with fine-grained authorization concept, user roles and pluggable authentication

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.