DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. BigchainDB vs. SiteWhere vs. Snowflake vs. Sphinx

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. BigchainDB vs. SiteWhere vs. Snowflake vs. Sphinx

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

M2M integration platform for persisting/querying time series data

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

Open source search engine for searching in data from different sources, e.g. relational databases

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

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

Score	0.82
Rank	#212	Overall
	#36	Document stores

Score	0.06
Rank	#367	Overall
	#36	Time Series DBMS

Score	123.20
Rank	#9	Overall
	#6	Relational DBMS

Score	6.03
Rank	#60	Overall
	#6	Search engines

Website

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

www.bigchaindb.com

github.com/sitewhere/sitewhere

www.snowflake.com

sphinxsearch.com

Technical documentation

bigchaindb.readthedocs.io/en/latest

sitewhere1.sitewhere.io/index.html

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

sphinxsearch.com/docs

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

SiteWhere

Snowflake Computing Inc.

Sphinx Technologies Inc.

Initial release

2016

2010

2014

2001

Current release

1703

3.5.1, February 2023

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

AGPL v3

Open Source

Common Public Attribution License Version 1.0

commercial

Open Source

GPL version 2, commercial licence available

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

Java

C++

Server operating systems

Linux

Linux
OS X
Windows

hosted

FreeBSD
Linux
NetBSD
OS X
Solaris
Windows

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

schema-free

predefined scheme

yes

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

yes

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

full-text index on all search fields

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

SQL-like query language (SphinxQL)

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

CLI Client
RESTful HTTP API

HTTP REST

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

Proprietary protocol

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript
Python
Ruby

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

C++

unofficial client library
Java
Perl

unofficial client library
PHP
Python
Ruby

unofficial client library

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

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

based on HBase

yes

Sharding

Partitioning is done manually, search queries against distributed index is supported

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

selectable replication factor

based on HBase

yes

none

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

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

The original contents of fields are not stored in the Sphinx index.

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

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

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.