DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Dragonfly vs. OpenQM vs. SWC-DB

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Dragonfly vs. OpenQM vs. SWC-DB

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.

Description

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

A drop-in Redis replacement that scales vertically to support millions of operations per second and terabyte sized workloads, all on a single instance

QpenQM is a high-performance, self-tuning, multi-value DBMS

A high performance, scalable Wide Column DBMS

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Key-value store

Multivalue DBMS

Wide column store

Secondary database models

Time Series DBMS

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

Score	0.41
Rank	#266	Overall
	#38	Key-value stores

Score	0.27
Rank	#298	Overall
	#10	Multivalue DBMS

Score	0.01
Rank	#376	Overall
	#13	Wide column stores

Website

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

github.com/dragonflydb/dragonfly
www.dragonflydb.io

www.rocketsoftware.com/products/rocket-multivalue-application-development-platform/rocket-open-qm

github.com/kashirin-alex/swc-db
www.swcdb.org

Technical documentation

www.dragonflydb.io/docs

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

DragonflyDB team and community contributors

Rocket Software, originally Martin Phillips

Alex Kashirin

Initial release

2016

2023

1993

2020

Current release

1703

1.0, March 2023

3.4-12

0.5, April 2021

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

BSL 1.1

Open Source

GPLv2, extended commercial license available

Open Source

GPL V3

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++

Server operating systems

Linux

AIX
FreeBSD
Linux
macOS
Raspberry Pi
Solaris
Windows

Linux

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

scheme-free

yes

with some exceptions

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

optional

strings, hashes, lists, sets, sorted sets, bit arrays

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

Proprietary protocol

RESP - REdis Serialization Protocol

Proprietary protocol
Thrift

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

C
C#
C++
Clojure
D
Dart
Elixir
Erlang
Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Lisp
Lua
Objective-C
Perl
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Rust
Scala
Swift
Tcl

.Net
Basic
C
Java
Objective C
PHP
Python

C++

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Lua

yes

Triggers

yes

publish/subscribe channels provide some trigger functionality

yes

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

Source-replica replication

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

Eventual Consistency

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

Transaction concepts

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

Atomic execution of specific operations

Atomic execution of command blocks and scripts

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

yes, strict serializability by the server

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

Password-based authentication

Access rights can be defined down to the item level

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

DragonflyDB Announces $21m in New Funding and General Availability
21 March 2023, Business Wire

DragonflyDB reels in $21M for its speedy in-memory database
21 March 2023, SiliconANGLE News

DragonflyDB Raises $21M in Funding
21 March 2023, FinSMEs

Dragonfly 1.0 Released For What Claims To Be The World's Fastest In-Memory Data Store
20 March 2023, Phoronix

Intel Linux Kernel Optimizations Show Huge Benefit For High Core Count Servers
29 March 2023, Phoronix

provided by Google News

2022 All O-Zone Football Team
17 December 2022, Ozarks Sports Zone

provided by Google News

Share this page