DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. BigchainDB vs. Microsoft Azure SQL Database vs. RDFox vs. Snowflake

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. BigchainDB vs. Microsoft Azure SQL Database vs. RDFox vs. Snowflake

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

BigchainDB is scalable blockchain database offering decentralization, immutability and native assets

Database as a Service offering with high compatibility to Microsoft SQL Server

High performance knowledge graph and semantic reasoning engine

Cloud-based data warehousing service for structured and semi-structured data

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Secondary database models

Document store
Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS

Relational DBMS

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

Score	0.79
Rank	#212	Overall
	#36	Document stores

Score	77.99
Rank	#16	Overall
	#11	Relational DBMS

Score	0.23
Rank	#308	Overall
	#25	Graph DBMS
	#14	RDF stores

Score	121.33
Rank	#9	Overall
	#6	Relational DBMS

Website

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

www.bigchaindb.com

azure.microsoft.com/en-us/products/azure-sql/database

www.oxfordsemantic.tech

www.snowflake.com

Technical documentation

bigchaindb.readthedocs.io/en/latest

docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/azure-sql

docs.oxfordsemantic.tech

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

Microsoft

Oxford Semantic Technologies

Snowflake Computing Inc.

Initial release

2016

2010

2017

2014

Current release

1703

V12

6.0, Septermber 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

AGPL v3

commercial

Cloud-based only

Only available as a cloud service

yes

DBaaS offerings (sponsored links)

Database as a Service

Providers of DBaaS offerings, please contact us to be listed.

Implementation language

Java

Python

C++

Server operating systems

Linux

hosted

Linux
macOS
Windows

hosted

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

schema-free

yes

RDF schemas

yes

support of semi-structured data formats (JSON, XML, Avro)

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

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

yes

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

CLI Client
RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

RESTful HTTP API
SPARQL 1.1

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript
Python
Ruby

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

C
Java

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Transact SQL

user defined functions

Triggers

yes

similar concept for controling cloud resources

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

Sharding

yes

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

selectable replication factor

yes, with always 3 replicas available

replication via a shared file system

yes

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration

Immediate Consistency

Immediate Consistency in stand-alone mode, Eventual Consistency in replicated setups

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

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

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

yes,with MongoDB ord RethinkDB

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

yes

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Roles, resources, and access types

Users with fine-grained authorization concept, user roles and pluggable authentication

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.