DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. DuckDB vs. KeyDB vs. Snowflake vs. SQLite

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. DuckDB vs. KeyDB vs. Snowflake vs. SQLite

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

An ultra-fast, open source Key-value store fully compatible with Redis API, modules, and protocols

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

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Key-value store

Relational DBMS

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

Score	4.57
Rank	#74	Overall
	#40	Relational DBMS

Score	0.71
Rank	#226	Overall
	#33	Key-value stores

Score	121.33
Rank	#9	Overall
	#6	Relational DBMS

Score	114.32
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Website

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

duckdb.org

github.com/Snapchat/KeyDB
keydb.dev

www.snowflake.com

www.sqlite.org

Technical documentation

duckdb.org/docs

docs.keydb.dev

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

EQ Alpha Technology Ltd.

Snowflake Computing Inc.

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Initial release

2016

2018

2019

2014

2000

Current release

1703

0.10, February 2024

3.46.0 (23 May 2024), May 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

MIT License

Open Source

BSD-3

commercial

Open Source

Public Domain

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

C++

Server operating systems

Linux

server-less

Linux

hosted

server-less

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

yes

schema-free

yes

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

yes

dynamic column types

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

optional

yes

partial

Supported data types are strings, hashes, lists, sets and sorted sets, bit arrays, hyperloglogs and geospatial indexes

yes

not rigid because of 'dynamic typing' concept.

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

by using the Redis Search module

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

Arrow Database Connectivity (ADBC)
CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

Proprietary protocol

RESP - REdis Serialization Protoco

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

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

C
C#
C++
Clojure
Crystal
D
Dart
Elixir
Erlang
Fancy
Go
Haskell
Haxe
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Lisp
Lua
MatLab
Objective-C
OCaml
Pascal
Perl
PHP
Prolog
Pure Data
Python
R
Rebol
Ruby
Rust
Scala
Scheme
Smalltalk
Swift
Tcl
Visual Basic

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

Actionscript
Ada
Basic
C
C#
C++
D
Delphi
Forth
Fortran
Haskell
Java
JavaScript
Lisp
Lua
MatLab
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
PL/SQL
Python
R
Ruby
Scala
Scheme
Smalltalk
Tcl

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Lua

user defined functions

Triggers

yes

similar concept for controling cloud resources

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

none

Sharding

yes

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

none

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

yes

none

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
Strong eventual consistency with CRDTs

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

Optimistic locking, atomic execution of commands blocks and scripts

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

yes, multi-version concurrency control (MVCC)

yes

via file-system locks

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

Configurable mechanisms for persistency via snapshots and/or operations logs

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

simple password-based access control and ACL

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.