DBMS > Apache IoTDB vs. Atos Standard Common Repository vs. BaseX vs. Graph Engine

System Properties Comparison Apache IoTDB vs. Atos Standard Common Repository vs. BaseX vs. Graph Engine

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

An IoT native database with high performance for data management and analysis, deployable on the edge and the cloud and integrated with Hadoop, Spark and Flink

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

Light-weight Native XML DBMS with support for XQuery 3.0 and interactive GUI.

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

Primary database model

Time Series DBMS

Document store
Key-value store

Native XML DBMS

Graph DBMS
Key-value store

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

Score	1.18
Rank	#173	Overall
	#15	Time Series DBMS

Score	1.73
Rank	#142	Overall
	#4	Native XML DBMS

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

Website

iotdb.apache.org

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

basex.org

www.graphengine.io

Technical documentation

iotdb.apache.org/UserGuide/Master/QuickStart/QuickStart.html

docs.basex.org

www.graphengine.io/docs/manual

Developer

Apache Software Foundation

Atos Convergence Creators

BaseX GmbH

Microsoft

Initial release

2018

2016

2007

2010

Current release

1.1.0, April 2023

1703

10.7, August 2023

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

commercial

Open Source

BSD license

Open Source

MIT License

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

Server operating systems

All OS with a Java VM (>= 1.8)

Linux

Linux
OS X
Windows

.NET

Data scheme

yes

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

optional

XQuery supports types

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

SQL-like query language

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
Native API

LDAP

Java API
RESTful HTTP API
RESTXQ
WebDAV
XML:DB
XQJ

RESTful HTTP API

Supported programming languages

C
C#
C++
Go
Java
Python
Scala

All languages with LDAP bindings

Actionscript
C
C#
Haskell
Java
JavaScript

Node.js
Lisp
Perl
PHP
Python
Qt
Rebol
Ruby
Scala
Visual Basic

C#
C++
F#
Visual Basic

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Triggers

yes

via events

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

horizontal partitioning (by time range) + vertical partitioning (by deviceId)

Sharding

cell division

none

horizontal partitioning

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

selectable replication methods; using Raft/IoTConsensus algorithm to ensure strong/eventual data consistency among multiple replicas

yes

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Integration with Hadoop and Spark

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Eventual Consistency
Strong Consistency with Raft

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

Transaction concepts

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

Atomic execution of specific operations

multiple readers, single writer

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

In-memory capabilities

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

yes

User concepts

Access control

yes

LDAP bind authentication

Users with fine-grained authorization concept on 4 levels

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

TsFile: A Standard Format for IoT Time Series Data
27 February 2024, The New Stack

Linux 6.5 With AMD P-State EPP Default Brings Performance & Power Efficiency Benefits For Ryzen Servers
21 September 2023, Phoronix

AMD EPYC 8324P / 8324PN Siena 32-Core Siena Linux Server Performance Review
10 October 2023, Phoronix

Apache Promotes IoT Database Project
25 September 2020, Datanami

Timecho Raises Over US$10M in First Funding
29 June 2022, FinSMEs

provided by Google News

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

provided by Google News

XML Injection Attacks: What to Know About XPath, XQuery, XXE & More
18 May 2022, Hashed Out by The SSL Store™

9 Skills You Need to Become a Data Engineer
2 November 2022, KDnuggets

provided by Google News

Trinity
2 June 2023, microsoft.com

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

Share this page