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

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

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)

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

A DBMS built for use on mobile devices that’s a fast, easy to use alternative to SQLite and Core Data

A high performance, scalable Wide Column DBMS

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Secondary database models

Time Series DBMS

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

Score	0.27
Rank	#297	Overall
	#44	Document stores

Score	0.27
Rank	#298	Overall
	#10	Multivalue DBMS

Score	7.60
Rank	#52	Overall
	#9	Document stores

Score	0.01
Rank	#376	Overall
	#13	Wide column stores

Website

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

github.com/Softmotions/ejdb

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

realm.io

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

Technical documentation

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

realm.io/docs

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

Softmotions

Rocket Software, originally Martin Phillips

Realm, acquired by MongoDB in May 2019

Alex Kashirin

Initial release

2016

2012

1993

2014

2020

Current release

1703

3.4-12

0.5, April 2021

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

GPLv2

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

server-less

AIX
FreeBSD
Linux
macOS
Raspberry Pi
Solaris
Windows

Android
Backend: server-less
iOS
Windows

Linux

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

schema-free

yes

with some exceptions

yes

schema-free

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

SQL-like query language

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

in-process shared library

Proprietary protocol
Thrift

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

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

.Net
Basic
C
Java
Objective C
PHP
Python

.Net
Java

with Android only
Objective-C
React Native
Swift

C++

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

runs within the applications so server-side scripts are unnecessary

Triggers

yes

Change Listeners

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

none

yes

none

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

none

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

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

typically not needed, however similar functionality with collection joins possible

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

In-Memory realm

User concepts

Access control

LDAP bind authentication

Access rights can be defined down to the item level

yes

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

DB-Engines blog posts

MySQL, PostgreSQL and Redis are the winners of the March ranking
2 March 2016, Paul Andlinger

show all

Recent citations in the news

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

provided by Google News

MongoDB aims to unify developer experience with launch of MongoDB Cloud
9 June 2020, diginomica

Danish CEO explains Silicon Valley learning curve for European entrepreneurs - San Francisco Business Times
6 October 2016, The Business Journals

Is Swift the Future of Server-side Development?
12 September 2017, Solutions Review

Java Synthetic Methods — What are these? | by Vaibhav Singh
27 February 2021, DataDrivenInvestor

Kotlin Programming Language Will Surpass Java On Android Next Year
15 October 2017, Fossbytes

provided by Google News

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

provided by Google News

Share this page