DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Couchbase vs. etcd vs. HarperDB vs. TigerGraph

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Couchbase vs. etcd vs. HarperDB vs. TigerGraph

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 distributed document store with integrated cache, a powerful search engine, in-built operational and analytical capabilities, and an embedded mobile database

A distributed reliable key-value store

Ultra-low latency distributed database with an intuitive REST API supporting NoSQL and SQL (including joins). Deployment of functions and databases simultaneously with a consolidated node-level architecture.

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

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Secondary database models

Key-value store

originating from the former Membase product and supporting the Memcached protocol
Spatial DBMS

using the Geocouch extension
Search engine
Time Series DBMS
Vector DBMS

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

Score	17.30
Rank	#36	Overall
	#5	Document stores

Score	7.25
Rank	#54	Overall
	#5	Key-value stores

Score	0.55
Rank	#248	Overall
	#38	Document stores

Score	1.83
Rank	#139	Overall
	#13	Graph DBMS

Website

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

www.couchbase.com

etcd.io
github.com/etcd-io/etcd

www.harperdb.io

www.tigergraph.com

Technical documentation

docs.couchbase.com

etcd.io/docs
github.com/etcd-io/etcd/tree/master/Documentation

docs.harperdb.io/docs

docs.tigergraph.com

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

Couchbase, Inc.

HarperDB

Initial release

2016

2011

2017

Current release

1703

Server: 7.2, June 2023; Mobile: 3.1, March 2022; Couchbase Capella (DBaaS), June 2023

3.4, August 2019

3.1, August 2021

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Business Source License (BSL 1.1); Commercial licenses also available

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

commercial

free community edition available

commercial

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, C++, Go and Erlang

Node.js

C++

Server operating systems

Linux

Linux
OS X
Windows

FreeBSD
Linux
Windows

experimental

Linux
OS X

Linux

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

schema-free

dynamic schema

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

optional

yes

JSON data types

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

SQL++, extends ANSI SQL to JSON for operational, transactional, and analytic use cases

SQL-like data manipulation statements

SQL-like query language (GSQL)

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

CLI Client
HTTP REST
Kafka Connector
Native language bindings for CRUD, Query, Search and Analytics APIs
Spark Connector
Spring Data

gRPC
JSON over HTTP

JDBC
ODBC
React Hooks
RESTful HTTP/JSON API
WebSocket

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

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

.Net
C
Go
Java
JavaScript

Node.js
Kotlin
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scala

.Net
C
C++
Clojure
Erlang
Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Perl
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Rust
Scala
Tcl

.Net
C
C#
C++
ColdFusion
D
Dart
Delphi
Erlang
Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Lisp
MatLab
Objective C
Perl
PHP
PowerShell
Prolog
Python
R
Ruby
Rust
Scala
Swift

C++
Java

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Functions and timers in JavaScript and UDFs in Java, Python, SQL++

Custom Functions

since release 3.1

yes

Triggers

yes

via the TAP protocol

yes, watching key changes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

Automatic Sharding

A table resides as a whole on one (or more) nodes in a cluster

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Multi-source replication

including cross data center replication
Source-replica replication

Using Raft consensus algorithm to ensure data replication with strong consistency among multiple replicas.

yes

the nodes on which a table resides can be defined

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
Immediate Consistency

selectable on a per-operation basis

Immediate 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

ACID

Atomic execution of specific operations

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

yes, using LMDB

yes

In-memory capabilities

Is there an option to define some or all structures to be held in-memory only.

yes

Ephemeral buckets

yes

User concepts

Access control

LDAP bind authentication

User and Administrator separation with password-based and LDAP integrated Authentication. Role-base access control.

Access rights for users and roles

Role-based access control

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.