DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Datomic vs. JaguarDB vs. Oracle Rdb vs. Yaacomo

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Datomic vs. JaguarDB vs. Oracle Rdb vs. Yaacomo

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

This system has been discontinued and will be removed from the DB-Engines ranking.

Yaacomo seems to be discontinued and is removed from the DB-Engines ranking

Description

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

Datomic builds on immutable values, supports point-in-time queries and uses 3rd party systems for durability

Performant, highly scalable DBMS for AI and IoT applications

OpenCL based in-memory RDBMS, designed for efficiently utilizing the hardware via parallel computing

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Key-value store
Vector DBMS

Relational DBMS

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

Score	1.59
Rank	#150	Overall
	#69	Relational DBMS

Score	0.00
Rank	#383	Overall
	#60	Key-value stores
	#13	Vector DBMS

Score	1.08
Rank	#184	Overall
	#85	Relational DBMS

Website

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

www.datomic.com

www.jaguardb.com

www.oracle.com/database/technologies/related/rdb.html

yaacomo.com

Technical documentation

docs.datomic.com

www.jaguardb.com/support.html

www.oracle.com/database/technologies/related/rdb-doc.html

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

Cognitect

DataJaguar, Inc.

Oracle, originally developed by Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC)

Q2WEB GmbH

Initial release

2016

2012

2015

1984

2009

Current release

1703

1.0.6735, June 2023

3.3 July 2023

7.4.1.1, 2021

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

limited edition free

Open Source

GPL V3.0

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

Java, Clojure

C++

the server part. Clients available in other languages

Server operating systems

Linux

All OS with a Java VM

Linux

HP Open VMS

Android
Linux
Windows

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

yes

Flexible Schema (defined schema, partial schema, schema free)

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

A subset of ANSI SQL is implemented

but no views, foreign keys, triggers

yes

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

RESTful HTTP API

JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

Clojure
Java

C
C++
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scala

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Transaction Functions

Triggers

yes

By using transaction functions

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

none

But extensive use of caching in the application peers

Sharding

horizontal partitioning

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

none

But extensive use of caching in the application peers

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

Eventual Consistency

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

yes, on a single node

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

using external storage systems (e.g. Cassandra, DynamoDB, PostgreSQL, Couchbase and others)

yes

In-memory capabilities

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

yes

recommended only for testing and development

yes

User concepts

Access control

LDAP bind authentication

rights management via user accounts

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

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

Recent citations in the news

Stanchion Turns SQLite Into A Column Store
15 February 2024, iProgrammer

Nubank buys firm behind Clojure programming language
28 July 2020, Finextra

Zoona Case Study
16 December 2017, AWS Blog

Architecting Software for Leverage
13 November 2021, InfoQ.com

TerminusDB Takes on Data Collaboration with a git-Like Approach
1 December 2020, The New Stack

provided by Google News

Oracle Adds New AI-Enabling Features To MySQL HeatWave
23 March 2023, Forbes

Should we all consolidate databases for the storage benefits? Reg vultures deploy DevOps, zoos, haircuts
18 September 2020, The Register

2013 Data Science Salary Survey – O'Reilly
4 May 2013, oreilly.com

provided by Google News

Share this page