DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. BaseX vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. searchxml

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. BaseX vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. searchxml

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines
Name	Atos Standard Common Repository  Xexclude from comparison	BaseX  Xexclude from comparison	Microsoft Azure Table Storage  Xexclude from comparison	searchxml  Xexclude from comparison
	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	Light-weight Native XML DBMS with support for XQuery 3.0 and interactive GUI.	A Wide Column Store for rapid development using massive semi-structured datasets	DBMS for structured and unstructured content wrapped with an application server
Primary database model	Document store Key-value store	Native XML DBMS	Wide column store	Native XML DBMS Search engine
DB-Engines Ranking measures the popularity of database management systems Trend Chart		Score 1.84 Rank #135   Overall #4   Native XML DBMS	Score 4.04 Rank #77   Overall #6   Wide column stores	Score 0.03 Rank #390   Overall #7   Native XML DBMS #24   Search engines
Website	atos.net/en/convergence-creators/portfolio/standard-common-repository	basex.org	azure.microsoft.com/­en-us/­services/­storage/­tables	www.searchxml.net/­category/­products
Technical documentation		docs.basex.org		www.searchxml.net/­support/­handouts
Developer	Atos Convergence Creators	BaseX GmbH	Microsoft	informationpartners gmbh
Initial release	2016	2007	2012	2015
Current release	1703	11.0, June 2024		1.0
License Commercial or Open Source	commercial	Open Source BSD license	commercial	commercial
Cloud-based only Only available as a cloud service	no	no	yes	no
DBaaS offerings (sponsored links) Database as a Service Providers of DBaaS offerings, please contact us to be listed.
Implementation language	Java	Java		C++
Server operating systems	Linux	Linux OS X Windows	hosted	Windows
Data scheme	Schema and schema-less with LDAP views	schema-free	schema-free	schema-free
Typing predefined data types such as float or date	optional	no XQuery supports types	yes	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		no	yes
Secondary indexes	yes	yes	no	yes
SQL Support of SQL	no	no	no	no
APIs and other access methods	LDAP	Java API RESTful HTTP API RESTXQ WebDAV XML:DB XQJ	RESTful HTTP API	RESTful HTTP API WebDAV XQuery XSLT
Supported programming languages	All languages with LDAP bindings	Actionscript C C# Haskell Java JavaScript Node.js Lisp Perl PHP Python Qt Rebol Ruby Scala Visual Basic	.Net C# C++ Java JavaScript (Node.js) PHP Python Ruby	C++ most other programming languages supported via APIs
Server-side scripts Stored procedures	no	yes	no	yes on the application server
Triggers	yes	yes via events	no	no
Partitioning methods Methods for storing different data on different nodes	Sharding cell division	none	Sharding Implicit feature of the cloud service	none
Replication methods Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes	yes	none	yes implicit feature of the cloud service. Replication either local, cross-facility or geo-redundant.	yes sychronisation to multiple collections
MapReduce Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods		no	no	no
Consistency concepts Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system	Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration		Immediate Consistency	Immediate Consistency
Foreign keys Referential integrity	no	no	no	no
Transaction concepts Support to ensure data integrity after non-atomic manipulations of data	Atomic execution of specific operations	multiple readers, single writer	optimistic locking	multiple readers, single writer
Concurrency Support for concurrent manipulation of data	yes	yes	yes	yes
Durability Support for making data persistent	yes	yes	yes	yes
In-memory capabilities Is there an option to define some or all structures to be held in-memory only.	yes		no	no
User concepts Access control	LDAP bind authentication	Users with fine-grained authorization concept on 4 levels	Access rights based on private key authentication or shared access signatures	Domain, group and role-based access control at the document level and for application services
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
	Atos Standard Common Repository	BaseX	Microsoft Azure Table Storage	searchxml
Recent citations in the 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	Working with Azure to Use and Manage Data Lakes 7 March 2024, Simplilearn How to Use C# Azure.Data.Tables SDK with Azure Cosmos DB 9 July 2021, hackernoon.com How to use Azure Table storage in .Net 14 January 2019, InfoWorld Quick Guide to Azure Storage Pricing 16 May 2023, DevOps.com Inside Azure File Storage 7 October 2015, azure.microsoft.com provided by Google News

Share this page