DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Blueflood vs. BoltDB vs. MarkLogic vs. RocksDB

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Blueflood vs. BoltDB vs. MarkLogic vs. RocksDB

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 Cassandra

An embedded key-value store for Go.

Operational and transactional Enterprise NoSQL database

Embeddable persistent key-value store optimized for fast storage (flash and RAM)

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Time Series DBMS

Key-value store

Document store
Native XML DBMS
RDF store

as of version 7
Search engine

Key-value store

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

Score	0.06
Rank	#353	Overall
	#34	Time Series DBMS

Score	0.74
Rank	#220	Overall
	#31	Key-value stores

Score	5.92
Rank	#58	Overall
	#10	Document stores
	#1	Native XML DBMS
	#1	RDF stores
	#6	Search engines

Score	3.65
Rank	#85	Overall
	#11	Key-value stores

Website

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

blueflood.io

github.com/boltdb/bolt

www.marklogic.com

rocksdb.org

Technical documentation

github.com/rax-maas/blueflood/wiki

docs.marklogic.com

github.com/facebook/rocksdb/wiki

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

Rackspace

MarkLogic Corp.

Facebook, Inc.

Initial release

2016

2013

2001

2013

Current release

1703

11.0, December 2022

8.11.4, April 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

MIT License

commercial

restricted free version is available

Open Source

BSD

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

C++

Server operating systems

Linux

Linux
OS X

BSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

Linux
OS X
Windows

Linux

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

predefined scheme

schema-free

Schema can be enforced

schema-free

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

SQL92

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

HTTP REST

Java API
Node.js Client API
ODBC
proprietary Optic API

Proprietary Query API, introduced with version 9
RESTful HTTP API
SPARQL
WebDAV
XDBC
XQuery
XSLT

C++ API
Java API

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

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

C
C++
Go
Java
Perl
Python
Ruby

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

via XQuery or JavaScript

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

Sharding

based on Cassandra

none

Sharding

horizontal partitioning

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

selectable replication factor

based on Cassandra

none

yes

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

via Hadoop Connector, HDFS Direct Access and in-database MapReduce jobs

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration

Eventual Consistency

based on Cassandra
Immediate Consistency

based on Cassandra

none

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

Transaction concepts

Support to ensure data integrity after non-atomic manipulations of data

Atomic execution of specific operations

yes

ACID

can act as a resource manager in an XA/JTA transaction

yes

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

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

yes, with Range Indexes

yes

User concepts

Access control

LDAP bind authentication

Role-based access control at the document and subdocument levels

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.