DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. EsgynDB vs. Lovefield vs. OrigoDB vs. Transwarp ArgoDB

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. EsgynDB vs. Lovefield vs. OrigoDB vs. Transwarp ArgoDB

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

Enterprise-class SQL-on-Hadoop solution, powered by Apache Trafodion

Embeddable relational database for web apps written in pure JavaScript

A fully ACID in-memory object graph database

Distributed Analytical Database to replace Hadoop+MPP hybrid architecture

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Document store
Object oriented DBMS

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Search engine

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

Score	0.25
Rank	#312	Overall
	#138	Relational DBMS

Score	0.33
Rank	#286	Overall
	#131	Relational DBMS

Score	0.06
Rank	#380	Overall
	#50	Document stores
	#18	Object oriented DBMS

Score	0.12
Rank	#348	Overall
	#151	Relational DBMS

Website

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

www.esgyn.cn

google.github.io/lovefield

origodb.com

www.transwarp.cn/en/product/argodb

Technical documentation

github.com/google/lovefield/blob/master/docs/spec_index.md

origodb.com/docs

docs.transwarp.cn/#/documents-support/docs?category=ARGODB

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

Esgyn

Google

Robert Friberg et al

Transwarp

Initial release

2016

2015

2014

2009

under the name LiveDB

Current release

1703

2.1.12, February 2017

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

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++, Java

JavaScript

Server operating systems

Linux

server-less, requires a JavaScript environment (browser, Node.js)

tested with Chrome, Firefox, IE, Safari

Linux
Windows

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

optional

yes

User defined using .NET types and collections

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

can be achieved using .NET

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

SQL-like query language

via JavaScript builder pattern

yes

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

.NET Client API
HTTP API
LINQ

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC/ADO.Net

JavaScript

.Net

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Java Stored Procedures

yes

Triggers

yes

Using read-only observers

yes

Domain Events

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

Sharding

none

horizontal partitioning

client side managed; servers are not synchronized

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Multi-source replication between multi datacenters

none

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

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

depending on model

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

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

yes, by using IndexedDB or the cloud service Firebase Realtime Database

yes

Write ahead log

yes

In-memory capabilities

Is there an option to define some or all structures to be held in-memory only.

yes

using MemoryDB

yes

User concepts

Access control

LDAP bind authentication

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Role based authorization

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