DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. EJDB vs. Linter

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. EJDB vs. Linter

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

Embeddable document-store database library with JSON representation of queries (in MongoDB style)

RDBMS for high security requirements

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Document store

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Spatial DBMS

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

Score	0.13
Rank	#331	Overall
	#46	Document stores

Score	0.03
Rank	#368	Overall
	#156	Relational DBMS

Website

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

github.com/Softmotions/ejdb

linter.ru

Technical documentation

github.com/Softmotions/ejdb/blob/master/README.md

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

Softmotions

relex.ru

Initial release

2016

2012

1990

Current release

1703

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

GPLv2

commercial

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 and C++

Server operating systems

Linux

server-less

AIX
Android
BSD
HP Open VMS
iOS
Linux
OS X
VxWorks
Windows

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

optional

yes

string, integer, double, bool, date, object_id

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

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

in-process shared library

ADO.NET
JDBC
LINQ
ODBC
OLE DB
Oracle Call Interface (OCI)

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

Actionscript
C
C#
C++
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Lua
Objective-C
Pike
Python
Ruby

C
C#
C++
Java
Perl
PHP
Python
Qt
Ruby
Tcl

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

proprietary syntax with the possibility to convert from PL/SQL

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

none

Source-replica replication

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

typically not needed, however similar functionality with collection joins possible

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

Read/Write 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

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

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.

Share this page