DBMS > ArcadeDB vs. Atos Standard Common Repository vs. etcd vs. Transbase

System Properties Comparison ArcadeDB vs. Atos Standard Common Repository vs. etcd vs. Transbase

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

Fast and scalable multi-model DBMS, originally forked from OrientDB but most of the code has been rewritten

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

A distributed reliable key-value store

A resource-optimized, high-performance, universally applicable RDBMS

Primary database model

Document store
Graph DBMS
Key-value store
Time Series DBMS

in next version

Document store
Key-value store

Key-value store

Relational DBMS

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

Score	0.02
Rank	#366	Overall
	#50	Document stores
	#38	Graph DBMS
	#53	Key-value stores
	#36	Time Series DBMS

Score	7.25
Rank	#54	Overall
	#5	Key-value stores

Score	0.11
Rank	#341	Overall
	#150	Relational DBMS

Website

arcadedb.com

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

etcd.io
github.com/etcd-io/etcd

www.transaction.de/en/products/transbase.html

Technical documentation

docs.arcadedb.com

etcd.io/docs
github.com/etcd-io/etcd/tree/master/Documentation

www.transaction.de/en/products/transbase/features.html

Developer

Arcade Data

Atos Convergence Creators

Transaction Software GmbH

Initial release

2021

2016

1987

Current release

September 2021

1703

3.4, August 2019

Transbase 8.3, 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

commercial

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

commercial

free development 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

C and C++

Server operating systems

All OS with a Java VM

Linux

FreeBSD
Linux
Windows

experimental

FreeBSD
Linux
macOS
Solaris
Windows

Data scheme

schema-free

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

optional

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, no joins

yes

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
MongoDB API
OpenCypher
PostgreSQL wire protocol
Redis API
RESTful HTTP/JSON API
TinkerPop Gremlin

LDAP

gRPC
JSON over HTTP

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
Proprietary native API

Supported programming languages

Java

All languages with LDAP bindings

.Net
C
C++
Clojure
Erlang
Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Perl
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Rust
Scala
Tcl

C
C#
C++
Java
JavaScript
Kotlin
Objective-C
PHP
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Triggers

yes

yes, watching key changes

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Source-replica replication

yes

Using Raft consensus algorithm to ensure data replication with strong consistency among multiple replicas.

Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

relationship in graphs

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Atomic execution of specific operations

yes

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

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

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

provided by Google News

Monitor Amazon EKS Control Plane metrics using AWS Open Source monitoring services | Amazon Web Services
12 October 2023, AWS Blog

Apache APISIX Without etcd?
27 July 2023, hackernoon.com

RBI reiterates need for underlying forex exposure for rupee derivatives transactions | Mint
5 April 2024, Mint

Killing a market, softly: How an RBI communique could end India's thriving ETCD market
7 April 2024, The Economic Times

Public preview: AKS cluster control plane metrics in managed Prometheus | Azure updates
12 February 2024, azure.microsoft.com

provided by Google News

Share this page