DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. CouchDB vs. TigerGraph vs. YottaDB

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. CouchDB vs. TigerGraph vs. YottaDB

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

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

A native JSON - document store inspired by Lotus Notes, scalable from globally distributed server-clusters down to mobile phones.

A complete, distributed, parallel graph computing platform supporting web-scale data analytics in real-time

A fast and solid embedded Key-value store

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Document store

Graph DBMS

Key-value store

Secondary database models

Spatial DBMS

using the Geocouch extension

Relational DBMS

using the Octo plugin

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

Score	7.46
Rank	#51	Overall
	#7	Document stores

Score	1.44
Rank	#152	Overall
	#14	Graph DBMS

Score	0.21
Rank	#309	Overall
	#43	Key-value stores

Website

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

couchdb.apache.org

www.tigergraph.com

yottadb.com

Technical documentation

docs.couchdb.org/en/stable

docs.tigergraph.com

yottadb.com/resources/documentation

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

Apache Software Foundation

Apache top-level project, originally developed by Damien Katz, a former Lotus Notes developer

YottaDB, LLC

Initial release

2016

2005

2017

2001

Current release

1703

3.3.3, December 2023

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache version 2

commercial

Open Source

AGPL 3.0

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

Erlang

C++

Server operating systems

Linux

Android
BSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

Linux

Docker
Linux

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

schema-free

yes

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

via views

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language (GSQL)

by using the Octo plugin

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

RESTful HTTP/JSON API

GSQL (TigerGraph Query Language)
Kafka
RESTful HTTP/JSON API

PostgreSQL wire protocol

using the Octo plugin
Proprietary protocol

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

C
C#
ColdFusion
Erlang
Haskell
Java
JavaScript
Lisp
Lua
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
PL/SQL
Python
Ruby
Smalltalk

C++
Java

C
Go
JavaScript (Node.js)
Lua
M
Perl
Python
Rust

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

View functions in JavaScript

yes

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

Sharding

improved architecture with release 2.0

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

yes

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration

Eventual Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Relationships in graphs

Transaction concepts

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

Atomic execution of specific operations

atomic operations within a single document possible

ACID

optimistic locking

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

strategy: optimistic locking

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

User concepts

Access control

LDAP bind authentication

Access rights for users can be defined per database

Role-based access control

Users and groups based on OS-security mechanisms

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

DB-Engines blog posts

Couchbase climbs up the DB-Engines Ranking, increasing its popularity by 10% every month
2 June 2014, Matthias Gelbmann

show all

Recent citations in the news

How to install the CouchDB NoSQL database on Debian Server 11
16 June 2022, TechRepublic

IBM Cloudant pulls plan to fund new foundational layer for CouchDB
15 March 2022, The Register

Database Ransom Attacks Hit CouchDB and Hadoop Servers
18 January 2017, BleepingComputer

Hadoop, CouchDB Next Targets in Wave of Database Attacks
20 January 2017, Threatpost

CouchDB 3.0 ends admin party era
27 February 2020, DevClass

provided by Google News

TigerGraph Unveils CoPilot, Version 4.0, and New CEO
30 April 2024, Datanami

TigerGraph unveils GenAI assistant, introduces new CEO
30 April 2024, TechTarget

How TigerGraph CoPilot enables graph-augmented AI
30 April 2024, InfoWorld

TigerGraph Bolsters DB for Enterprise Graph Workloads
1 November 2023, Datanami

TigerGraph raises $105M Series C for its enterprise graph database
17 February 2021, TechCrunch

provided by Google News

Share this page