DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Axibase vs. EJDB vs. OrientDB

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Axibase vs. EJDB vs. OrientDB

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

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

Scalable TimeSeries DBMS based on HBase with integrated rule engine and visualization

Embeddable document-store database library with JSON representation of queries (in MongoDB style)

Multi-model DBMS (Document, Graph, Key/Value)

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Time Series DBMS

Document store

Document store
Graph DBMS
Key-value store

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

Score	0.29
Rank	#292	Overall
	#25	Time Series DBMS

Score	0.27
Rank	#297	Overall
	#44	Document stores

Score	3.19
Rank	#93	Overall
	#16	Document stores
	#7	Graph DBMS
	#14	Key-value stores

Website

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

axibase.com/docs/atsd/finance

github.com/Softmotions/ejdb

orientdb.org

Technical documentation

github.com/Softmotions/ejdb/blob/master/README.md

www.orientdb.com/docs/last/index.html

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

Axibase Corporation

Softmotions

OrientDB LTD; CallidusCloud; SAP

Initial release

2016

2013

2012

2010

Current release

1703

15585

3.2.29, March 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Community Edition (single node) is free, Enterprise Edition (distributed) is paid

Open Source

GPLv2

Open Source

Apache version 2

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

Server operating systems

Linux

server-less

All OS with a Java JDK (>= JDK 6)

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

yes

schema-free

Schema can be enforced for whole record ("schema-full") or for some fields only ("schema-hybrid")

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

optional

yes

short, integer, long, float, double, decimal, string

yes

string, integer, double, bool, date, object_id

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

SQL-like query language, no joins

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

JDBC
Proprietary protocol (Network API)
RESTful HTTP API

in-process shared library

Tinkerpop technology stack with Blueprints, Gremlin, Pipes
Java API
RESTful HTTP/JSON API

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

Go
Java
PHP
Python
R
Ruby

Actionscript
C
C#
C++
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Lua
Objective-C
Pike
Python
Ruby

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

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Java, Javascript

Triggers

yes

Hooks

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

Sharding

none

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Source-replica replication

none

Multi-source replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

could be achieved with distributed queries

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

typically not needed, however similar functionality with collection joins possible

yes

relationship in graphs

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

Read/Write Locking

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

Access rights for users and roles; record level security configurable

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

DB-Engines blog posts

Graph DBMS increased their popularity by 500% within the last 2 years
3 March 2015, Paul Andlinger

Graph DBMSs are gaining in popularity faster than any other database category
21 January 2014, Matthias Gelbmann

show all

Recent citations in the news

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

provided by Google News

The Ultimate ATV Test: Suzuki's King Quad 750 AXI Rugged Package vs. Alaska's Hunting Season
20 April 2021, Outdoor Life

Time Series Databases Software Market - A comprehensive study by Key Players | Warp 10, Amazon Timestream ...
6 February 2020, openPR

provided by Google News

The 12 Best Graph Databases to Consider for 2024
22 October 2023, Solutions Review

OrientDB: A Flexible and Scalable Multi-Model NoSQL DBMS
21 January 2022, Open Source For You

Comparing Graph Databases II. Part 2: ArangoDB, OrientDB, and… | by Sam Bell
20 September 2019, Towards Data Science

ArangoDB raises $10 million for NoSQL database management
14 March 2019, VentureBeat

K2View updates DataOps platform with data fabric automation
11 May 2021, TechTarget

provided by Google News

Share this page