DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. BigObject vs. Google Cloud Spanner vs. gStore

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. BigObject vs. Google Cloud Spanner vs. gStore

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines
Name	Atos Standard Common Repository  Xexclude from comparison	BigObject  Xexclude from comparison	Google Cloud Spanner  Xexclude from comparison	gStore  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	Analytic DBMS for real-time computations and queries	A horizontally scalable, globally consistent, relational database service. It is the externalization of the core Google database that runs the biggest aspects of Google, like Ads and Google Play.	A native Graph DBMS to store and maintain very large RDF datasets.
Primary database model	Document store Key-value store	Relational DBMS a hierachical model (tree) can be imposed	Relational DBMS	Graph DBMS RDF store
DB-Engines Ranking measures the popularity of database management systems Trend Chart		Score 0.19 Rank #329   Overall #146   Relational DBMS	Score 2.84 Rank #100   Overall #51   Relational DBMS	Score 0.14 Rank #342   Overall #34   Graph DBMS #16   RDF stores
Website	atos.net/en/convergence-creators/portfolio/standard-common-repository	bigobject.io	cloud.google.com/­spanner	en.gstore.cn
Technical documentation		docs.bigobject.io	cloud.google.com/­spanner/­docs	en.gstore.cn/­#/­enDocs
Developer	Atos Convergence Creators	BigObject, Inc.	Google
Initial release	2016	2015	2017	2016
Current release	1703			1.2, November 2023
License Commercial or Open Source	commercial	commercial free community edition available	commercial	Open Source BSD
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			C++
Server operating systems	Linux	Linux distributed as a docker-image OS X distributed as a docker-image (boot2docker) Windows distributed as a docker-image (boot2docker)	hosted	Linux
Data scheme	Schema and schema-less with LDAP views	yes	yes	schema-free and OWL/RDFS-schema support
Typing predefined data types such as float or date	optional	yes	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	no	no
Secondary indexes	yes	yes	yes
SQL Support of SQL	no	SQL-like DML and DDL statements	yes Query statements complying to ANSI 2011	no
APIs and other access methods	LDAP	fluentd ODBC RESTful HTTP API	gRPC (using protocol buffers) API JDBC At present, JDBC supports read-only queries. No support for DDL or DML statements. RESTful HTTP API	HTTP API SPARQL 1.1
Supported programming languages	All languages with LDAP bindings		Go Java JavaScript (Node.js) Python	C++ Java JavaScript (Node.js) PHP Python
Server-side scripts Stored procedures	no	Lua	no	yes
Triggers	yes	no	no
Partitioning methods Methods for storing different data on different nodes	Sharding cell division	none	Sharding
Replication methods Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes	yes	none	Multi-source replication with 3 replicas for regional instances.
MapReduce Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods		no	yes using Google Cloud Dataflow	no
Consistency concepts Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system	Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration	none	Immediate Consistency
Foreign keys Referential integrity	no	yes automatically between fact table and dimension tables	yes by using interleaved tables, this features focuses more on performance improvements than on referential integrity
Transaction concepts Support to ensure data integrity after non-atomic manipulations of data	Atomic execution of specific operations	no	ACID Strict serializable isolation	yes
Concurrency Support for concurrent manipulation of data	yes	yes Read/write lock on objects (tables, trees)	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	yes	no	no
User concepts Access control	LDAP bind authentication	no	Access rights for users, groups and roles based on Google Cloud Identity and Access Management (IAM)	Users, roles and permissions, Role-Based Access Control (RBAC) supported
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	BigObject	Google Cloud Spanner	gStore
Recent citations in the news			Google's Cloud Spanner Now Spans Continents … Like It's Supposed to Do 31 May 2024, Data Center Knowledge Google Improves Cloud Spanner: More Compute and Storage without Price Increase 14 October 2023, InfoQ.com Google makes its Cloud Spanner database service faster and more cost-efficient 11 October 2023, SiliconANGLE News Google turns up the heat on AWS, claims Cloud Spanner is half the cost of DynamoDB 11 October 2023, TechCrunch Google Spanner: When Do You Need to Move to It? 11 September 2023, hackernoon.com provided by Google News

Share this page