DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Dgraph vs. Graphite vs. IRONdb vs. Snowflake

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Dgraph vs. Graphite vs. IRONdb vs. Snowflake

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

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

IRONdb seems to be discontinued. Therefore it is excluded from the DB-Engines Ranking.

Description

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

Distributed and scalable native Graph DBMS

Data logging and graphing tool for time series data

The storage layer (fixed size database) is called Whisper

A distributed Time Series DBMS with a focus on scalability, fault tolerance and operational simplicity

Cloud-based data warehousing service for structured and semi-structured data

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Graph DBMS

Time Series DBMS

Relational DBMS

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

Score	1.39
Rank	#155	Overall
	#15	Graph DBMS

Score	5.19
Rank	#62	Overall
	#4	Time Series DBMS

Score	133.72
Rank	#7	Overall
	#5	Relational DBMS

Website

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

dgraph.io

github.com/graphite-project/graphite-web

www.circonus.com/solutions/time-series-database/

www.snowflake.com

Technical documentation

dgraph.io/docs

graphite.readthedocs.io

docs.circonus.com/irondb/category/getting-started

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

Dgraph Labs, Inc.

Chris Davis

Circonus LLC.

Snowflake Computing Inc.

Initial release

2016

2006

2017

2014

Current release

1703

V0.10.20, January 2018

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

Apache 2.0

commercial

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

Python

C and C++

Server operating systems

Linux

Linux
OS X
Windows

Linux
Unix

Linux

hosted

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

schema-free

yes

schema-free

yes

support of semi-structured data formats (JSON, XML, Avro)

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

optional

yes

Numeric data only

yes

text, numeric, histograms

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-like query language (Circonus Analytics Query Language: CAQL)

yes

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

GraphQL query language
gRPC (using protocol buffers) API
HTTP API

HTTP API
Sockets

HTTP API

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

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

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

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

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes, in Lua

user defined functions

Triggers

yes

similar concept for controling cloud resources

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

yes

none

Automatic, metric affinity per node

yes

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Synchronous replication via Raft

none

configurable replication factor, datacenter aware

yes

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

none

Immediate consistency per node, eventual consistency across nodes

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

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

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

Planned for future releases

Users with fine-grained authorization concept, user roles and pluggable authentication

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.