DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Faircom DB vs. SQLite vs. TimesTen

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Faircom DB vs. SQLite vs. TimesTen

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

Native high-speed multi-model DBMS for relational and key-value store data simultaneously accessible through SQL and NoSQL APIs.

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

In-Memory RDBMS compatible to Oracle

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Key-value store
Relational DBMS

Relational DBMS

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

Score	0.20
Rank	#318	Overall
	#48	Key-value stores
	#141	Relational DBMS

Score	114.32
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Score	1.31
Rank	#163	Overall
	#74	Relational DBMS

Website

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

www.faircom.com/products/faircom-db

www.sqlite.org

www.oracle.com/database/technologies/related/timesten.html

Technical documentation

docs.faircom.com/docs/en/UUID-7446ae34-a1a7-c843-c894-d5322e395184.html

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

docs.oracle.com/database/timesten-18.1

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

FairCom Corporation

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Oracle, TimesTen Performance Software, HP

originally founded in HP Labs it was acquired by Oracle in 2005

Initial release

2016

1979

2000

1998

Current release

1703

V12, November 2020

3.45.3 (15 April 2024), April 2024

11 Release 2 (11.2.2.8.0)

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Restricted, free version available

Open Source

Public Domain

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

ANSI C, C++

Server operating systems

Linux

AIX
FreeBSD
HP-UX
Linux
NetBSD
OS X
QNX
SCO
Solaris
VxWorks
Windows

easily portable to other OSs

server-less

AIX
HP-UX
Linux
OS X
Solaris SPARC/x86
Windows

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

schema free, schema optional, schema required, partial schema,

yes

dynamic column types

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

optional

yes, ANSI SQL Types, JSON, typed binary structures

yes

not rigid because of 'dynamic typing' concept.

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, ANSI SQL with proprietary extensions

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

yes

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

ADO.NET
Direct SQL
JDBC
JPA
ODBC
RESTful HTTP/JSON API
RESTful MQTT/JSON API
RPC

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

JDBC
ODBC
ODP.NET
Oracle Call Interface (OCI)

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

.Net
C
C#
C++
Java
JavaScript (Node.js and browser)
PHP
Python
Visual Basic

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

C
C++
Java
PL/SQL

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

.Net, JavaScript, C/C++

PL/SQL

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

File partitioning, horizontal partitioning, sharding

Customizable business rules for table partitioning

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

yes, configurable to be parallel or serial, synchronous or asynchronous, uni-directional or bi-directional, ACID-consistent or eventually consistent (with custom conflict resolution).

none

Multi-source replication
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

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency
Tunable consistency per server, database, table, and transaction

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

Atomic execution of specific operations

tunable from ACID to Eventually Consistent

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

via file-system locks

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

Yes, tunable from durable to delayed durability to in-memory

yes

by means of logfiles and checkpoints

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 with additional protections for files

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.