DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Ehcache vs. Heroic vs. OpenEdge vs. TigerGraph

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Ehcache vs. Heroic vs. OpenEdge vs. TigerGraph

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 widely adopted Java cache with tiered storage options

Time Series DBMS built at Spotify based on Cassandra or Google Cloud Bigtable, and ElasticSearch

Application development environment with integrated database management system

A complete, distributed, parallel graph computing platform supporting web-scale data analytics in real-time

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

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

Score	4.89
Rank	#67	Overall
	#8	Key-value stores

Score	0.51
Rank	#255	Overall
	#21	Time Series DBMS

Score	3.51
Rank	#86	Overall
	#46	Relational DBMS

Score	1.83
Rank	#139	Overall
	#13	Graph DBMS

Website

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

www.ehcache.org

github.com/spotify/heroic

www.progress.com/openedge

www.tigergraph.com

Technical documentation

www.ehcache.org/documentation

spotify.github.io/heroic

documentation.progress.com/output/ua/OpenEdge_latest

docs.tigergraph.com

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

Terracotta Inc, owned by Software AG

Spotify

Progress Software Corporation

Initial release

2016

2009

2014

1984

2017

Current release

1703

3.10.0, March 2022

OpenEdge 12.2, March 2020

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache Version 2; commercial licenses available

Open Source

Apache 2.0

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++

Server operating systems

Linux

All OS with a Java VM

AIX
HP-UX
Linux
Solaris
Windows

Linux

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

schema-free

yes

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

via Elasticsearch

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

close to SQL 92

SQL-like query language (GSQL)

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

JCache

HQL (Heroic Query Language, a JSON-based language)
HTTP API

JDBC
ODBC

GSQL (TigerGraph Query Language)
Kafka
RESTful HTTP/JSON API

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

Java

Progress proprietary ABL (Advanced Business Language)

C++
Java

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Triggers

yes

Cache Event Listeners

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

Sharding

by using Terracotta Server

Sharding

horizontal partitioning

since Version 11.4

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

by using Terracotta Server

yes

Source-replica 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

Tunable Consistency (Strong, Eventual, Weak)

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Relationships in graphs

Transaction concepts

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

Atomic execution of specific operations

yes

supports JTA and can work as an XA resource

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

using a tiered cache-storage approach

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

Users and groups

Role-based access control

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

Atlassian asks customers to patch critical Jira vulnerability
22 July 2021, BleepingComputer

Critical Jira Flaw in Atlassian Could Lead to RCE
22 July 2021, Threatpost

DZone Coding Java JBoss 5 to 7 in 11 steps
9 January 2014, dzone.com

provided by Google News

Review: Google Bigtable scales with ease
7 September 2016, InfoWorld

provided by Google News

OpenEdge Application Development | Progress OpenEdge
14 September 2014, Progress Software

What's New in OpenEdge 12.8
15 April 2024, release.nl

PoC Exploit Released for OpenEdge Authentication Gateway & AdminServer Vulnerability
11 March 2024, GBHackers

provided by Google News

TigerGraph Unveils CoPilot, Version 4.0, and New CEO
30 April 2024, Datanami

TigerGraph unveils GenAI assistant, introduces new CEO
30 April 2024, TechTarget

How TigerGraph CoPilot enables graph-augmented AI
30 April 2024, InfoWorld

TigerGraph Bolsters DB for Enterprise Graph Workloads
1 November 2023, Datanami

Aerospike takes on Neo4j and TigerGraph with launch of graph database
20 June 2023, SiliconANGLE News

provided by Google News

Share this page