DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Coveo vs. Drizzle vs. VoltDB

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Coveo vs. Drizzle vs. VoltDB

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.

Drizzle has published its last release in September 2012. The open-source project is discontinued and Drizzle is excluded from the DB-Engines ranking.

Description

Highly scalable database system, designed for managing session and subscriber data in modern mobile communication networks

AI-powered hosted search, recommendation and personalization platform providing tools for both low-code and full-code development

MySQL fork with a pluggable micro-kernel and with an emphasis of performance over compatibility.

Distributed In-Memory NewSQL RDBMS

Used for OLTP applications with a high frequency of relatively simple transactions, that can hold all their data in memory

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Search engine

Relational DBMS

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

Score	2.11
Rank	#118	Overall
	#11	Search engines

Score	1.47
Rank	#157	Overall
	#73	Relational DBMS

Website

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

www.coveo.com

www.voltdb.com

Technical documentation

docs.coveo.com

docs.voltdb.com

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

Coveo

Drizzle project, originally started by Brian Aker

VoltDB Inc.

Initial release

2016

2012

2008

2010

Current release

1703

7.2.4, September 2012

11.3, April 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

GNU GPL

Open Source

AGPL for Community Edition, commercial license for Enterprise, AWS, and Pro Editions

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

C++

Java, C++

Server operating systems

Linux

hosted

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X

Linux
OS X

for development

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

hybrid - fields need to be configured prior to indexing, but relationships can be exploited at query time without pre-configuration

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

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

with proprietary extensions

yes

only a subset of SQL 99

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

RESTful HTTP API

JDBC

Java API
JDBC
RESTful HTTP/JSON API

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

C#
Java
JavaScript
Python

C
C++
Java
PHP

C#
C++
Erlang

not officially supported
Go
Java
JavaScript

Node.js
PHP
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Java

Triggers

yes

hooks for callbacks inside the server can be used.

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

yes

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

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

FOREIGN KEY constraints are not supported

Transaction concepts

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

Atomic execution of specific operations

yes

ACID

Transactions are executed single-threaded within stored procedures

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Data access is serialized by the server

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

Snapshots and command logging

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

granular access controls, API key management, content filters

Pluggable authentication mechanisms

e.g. LDAP, HTTP

Users and roles with access to stored procedures

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

MySQL won the April ranking; did its forks follow?
1 April 2015, Paul Andlinger

Has MySQL finally lost its mojo?
1 July 2013, Matthias Gelbmann

show all

Recent citations in the news

Patrick Martin Sells 1531 Shares of Coveo Solutions Inc (TSE:CVO.TO) Stock
16 June 2024, Defense World

Is It Time To Consider Buying Coveo Solutions Inc. (TSE:CVO)?
6 June 2024, Yahoo Finance

Coveo Debuts GenAI Tools on Genesys Cloud and AppFoundry
17 May 2024, CX Today

Coveo Solutions Reports Strong Fiscal 2024 Results - TipRanks.com
3 June 2024, TipRanks

Coveo's 2024 Commerce Industry Report Finds More Than 70% of Consumers are Expecting Generative AI to ...
6 June 2024, PR Newswire

provided by Google News

Unveiling Volt Active Data's game-changing approach to limitless app performance
16 October 2023, YourStory

VoltDB Launches Active(N) Lossless Cross Data Center Replication
31 August 2021, PR Newswire

VoltDB Turns to Real-Time Analytics with NewSQL Database
30 January 2014, Datanami

VoltDB Upgrades Power, Security of Its In-Memory Database
1 February 2017, eWeek

VoltDB Adds Geospatial Support, Cross-Site Replication
28 January 2016, The New Stack

provided by Google News

Share this page