DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. DuckDB vs. HyperSQL vs. RavenDB

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. DuckDB vs. HyperSQL vs. RavenDB

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

An embeddable, in-process, column-oriented SQL OLAP RDBMS

Multithreaded, transactional RDBMS written in Java

also known as HSQLDB

Open Source Operational and Transactional Enterprise NoSQL Document Database

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Document store

Secondary database models

Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS
Time Series DBMS

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

Score	4.63
Rank	#69	Overall
	#37	Relational DBMS

Score	3.23
Rank	#93	Overall
	#48	Relational DBMS

Score	2.84
Rank	#101	Overall
	#18	Document stores

Website

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

duckdb.org

hsqldb.org

ravendb.net

Technical documentation

duckdb.org/docs

hsqldb.org/web/hsqlDocsFrame.html

ravendb.net/docs

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

Hibernating Rhinos

Initial release

2016

2018

2001

2010

Current release

1703

1.0.0, June 2024

2.7.2, June 2023

5.4, July 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

MIT License

Open Source

based on BSD license

Open Source

AGPL version 3, commercial license available

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++

Java

Server operating systems

Linux

server-less

All OS with a Java VM

Embedded (into Java applications) and Client-Server operating modes

Linux
macOS
Raspberry Pi
Windows

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

yes

schema-free

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

SQL-like query language (RQL)

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

Arrow Database Connectivity (ADBC)
CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

HTTP API

JDBC via HTTP
JDBC
ODBC

.NET Client API
F# Client API
Go Client API
Java Client API
NodeJS Client API
PHP Client API
Python Client API
RESTful HTTP API

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

C
C#

3rd party driver
C++
Crystal

3rd party driver
Go

3rd party driver
Java
Lisp

3rd party driver
Python
R
Ruby

3rd party driver
Rust
Swift
Zig

3rd party driver

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC
Java

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

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Java, SQL

yes

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

none

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

none

Multi-source replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration

Immediate Consistency

Default ACID transactions on the local node (eventually consistent across the cluster). Atomic operations with cluster-wide ACID transactions. Eventual consistency for indexes and full-text search indexes.

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

Atomic execution of specific operations

ACID

ACID, Cluster-wide transaction available

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

yes, multi-version concurrency control (MVCC)

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

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Authorization levels configured per client per database

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

DuckDB promises greater stability with 1.0 release
5 June 2024, The Register

DuckDB: The tiny but powerful analytics database
15 May 2024, InfoWorld

DuckDB 1.0 Released
4 June 2024, iProgrammer

DuckDB: In-Process Python Analytics for Not-Quite-Big Data
31 May 2024, The New Stack

DuckDB Walks to the Beat of Its Own Analytics Drum
5 March 2024, Datanami

provided by Google News

HyperSQL DataBase flaw leaves library vulnerable to RCE
24 October 2022, The Daily Swig

Introduction to JDBC with HSQLDB tutorial
14 November 2022, TheServerSide.com

provided by Google News

RavenDB Launches Version 6.0 Lightning Fast Queries, Data Integrations, Corax Indexing Engine, and Sharding
3 October 2023, PR Newswire

Install the NoSQL RavenDB Data System
14 May 2021, The New Stack

RavenDB Adds Graph Queries
15 May 2019, Datanami

RavenDB Welcomes David Baruc as Chief Revenue Officer: Seasoned Tech Leader to Drive Global Sales and ...
13 June 2023, PR Newswire

Review: NoSQL database RavenDB
20 March 2019, TechGenix

provided by Google News

Share this page