DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. FatDB vs. Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB vs. SiriDB

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. FatDB vs. Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB vs. SiriDB

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.

FatDB/FatCloud has ceased operations as a company with February 2014. FatDB is discontinued and excluded from the ranking.

Description

Highly scalable database system, designed for managing session and subscriber data in modern mobile communication networks

A .NET NoSQL DBMS that can integrate with and extend SQL Server.

Globally distributed, horizontally scalable, multi-model database service

Open Source Time Series DBMS

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Document store
Graph DBMS
Key-value store
Wide column store

Time Series DBMS

Secondary database models

Spatial DBMS

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

Score	27.71
Rank	#27	Overall
	#4	Document stores
	#2	Graph DBMS
	#3	Key-value stores
	#3	Wide column stores

Score	0.07
Rank	#378	Overall
	#42	Time Series DBMS

Website

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

azure.microsoft.com/services/cosmos-db

siridb.com

Technical documentation

learn.microsoft.com/azure/cosmos-db

docs.siridb.com

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

FatCloud

Microsoft

Cesbit

Initial release

2016

2012

2014

2017

Current release

1703

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

MIT License

Cloud-based only

Only available as a cloud service

yes

DBaaS offerings (sponsored links)

Database as a Service

Providers of DBaaS offerings, please contact us to be listed.

Implementation language

Java

Server operating systems

Linux

Windows

hosted

Linux

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

optional

yes

JSON types

yes

Numeric data

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

All properties auto-indexed by default

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

Via inetgration in SQL Server

SQL-like query language

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

.NET Client API
LINQ
RESTful HTTP API
RPC
Windows WCF Bindings

DocumentDB API
Graph API (Gremlin)
MongoDB API
RESTful HTTP API
Table API

HTTP API

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

.Net
C#
Java
JavaScript
JavaScript (Node.js)
MongoDB client drivers written for various programming languages
Python

C
C++
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
R

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

via applications

JavaScript

Triggers

yes

via applications

JavaScript

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

selectable replication factor

yes

Implicit feature of the cloud service

yes

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

with Hadoop integration

Integration with Hadoop/HDInsight on Azure*

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Bounded Staleness
Consistent Prefix
Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Consistency level configurable on request level
Session Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

Transaction concepts

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

Atomic execution of specific operations

Multi-item ACID transactions with snapshot isolation within a partition

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

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

Can implement custom security layer via applications

Access rights can be defined down to the item level

simple rights management via user accounts

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.