DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Dgraph vs. etcd vs. Machbase Neo vs. SiteWhere

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Dgraph vs. etcd vs. Machbase Neo vs. SiteWhere

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

Distributed and scalable native Graph DBMS

A distributed reliable key-value store

TimeSeries DBMS for AIoT and BigData

M2M integration platform for persisting/querying time series data

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Graph DBMS

Key-value store

Time Series DBMS

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

Score	1.45
Rank	#156	Overall
	#15	Graph DBMS

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

Score	0.12
Rank	#339	Overall
	#30	Time Series DBMS

Score	0.06
Rank	#356	Overall
	#35	Time Series DBMS

Website

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

dgraph.io

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

machbase.com

github.com/sitewhere/sitewhere

Technical documentation

dgraph.io/docs

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

machbase.com/dbms

sitewhere1.sitewhere.io/index.html

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

Dgraph Labs, Inc.

Machbase

SiteWhere

Initial release

2016

2013

2010

Current release

1703

3.4, August 2019

V8.0, August 2023

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

commercial

free test version available

Open Source

Common Public Attribution License Version 1.0

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

Server operating systems

Linux

Linux
OS X
Windows

FreeBSD
Linux
Windows

experimental

Linux
macOS
Windows

Linux
OS X
Windows

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

schema-free

yes

predefined scheme

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

SQL-like query language

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

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

gRPC
JSON over HTTP

gRPC
HTTP REST
JDBC
MQTT (Message Queue Telemetry Transport)
ODBC

HTTP REST

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

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

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

C
C#
C++
Go
Java
JavaScript
PHP

via ODBC
Python
R

via ODBC
Scala

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Triggers

yes

yes, watching key changes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

yes

Sharding

based on HBase

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Synchronous replication via Raft

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

selectable replication factor

based on HBase

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

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

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

volatile and lookup table

User concepts

Access control

LDAP bind authentication

Planned for future releases

simple password-based access control

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

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

Infographic: What makes a Mobile Operator's setup future proof?
10 February 2024, Atos

provided by Google News

The 12 Best Graph Databases to Consider for 2024
22 October 2023, Solutions Review

Dgraph on AWS: Setting up a horizontally scalable graph database | Amazon Web Services
1 September 2020, AWS Blog

Dgraph Rises to the Top Graph Database on GitHub With 11 G2 Badges and 11M Downloads
26 May 2021, Business Wire

Dgraph Raises $6M in Seed Funding
20 July 2022, FinSMEs

provided by Google News

Monitor Amazon EKS Control Plane metrics using AWS Open Source monitoring services | Amazon Web Services
12 October 2023, AWS Blog

Apache APISIX Without etcd?
27 July 2023, hackernoon.com

RBI reiterates need for underlying forex exposure for rupee derivatives transactions | Stock Market News
5 April 2024, Mint

Killing a market, softly: How an RBI communique could end India's thriving ETCD market
7 April 2024, The Economic Times

ETCD directives don't go well with RBI's stellar reputation
14 April 2024, Business Standard

provided by Google News

SiteWhere: An open platform for connected devices
11 July 2017, Open Source For You

Ten Popular IoT Platforms You Should be Aware of
27 March 2023, Open Source For You

11 Best Open source IoT Platforms To Develop Smart Projects
9 March 2023, H2S Media

provided by Google News

Share this page