DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. etcd vs. FatDB vs. SiteWhere vs. SWC-DB

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. etcd vs. FatDB vs. SiteWhere vs. SWC-DB

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 distributed reliable key-value store

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

M2M integration platform for persisting/querying time series data

A high performance, scalable Wide Column DBMS

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Key-value store

Document store
Key-value store

Time Series DBMS

Wide column store

Secondary database models

Time Series DBMS

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

Score	7.25
Rank	#54	Overall
	#5	Key-value stores

Score	0.06
Rank	#356	Overall
	#35	Time Series DBMS

Score	0.01
Rank	#376	Overall
	#13	Wide column stores

Website

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

etcd.io
github.com/etcd-io/etcd

github.com/sitewhere/sitewhere

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

Technical documentation

etcd.io/docs
github.com/etcd-io/etcd/tree/master/Documentation

sitewhere1.sitewhere.io/index.html

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

FatCloud

SiteWhere

Alex Kashirin

Initial release

2016

2012

2010

2020

Current release

1703

3.4, August 2019

0.5, April 2021

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

commercial

Open Source

Common Public Attribution License Version 1.0

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

FreeBSD
Linux
Windows

experimental

Windows

Linux
OS X
Windows

Linux

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

schema-free

predefined scheme

schema-free

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

SQL

Support of SQL

Via inetgration in SQL Server

SQL-like query language

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

gRPC
JSON over HTTP

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

HTTP REST

Proprietary protocol
Thrift

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

.Net
C
C++
Clojure
Erlang
Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Perl
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Rust
Scala
Tcl

C++

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

via applications

Triggers

yes

yes, watching key changes

yes

via applications

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

Sharding

based on HBase

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Using Raft consensus algorithm to ensure data replication with strong consistency among multiple replicas.

selectable replication factor

based on HBase

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

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

Transaction concepts

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

Atomic execution of specific operations

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

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

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

Monitor Amazon EKS Control Plane metrics using AWS Open Source monitoring services | Amazon Web Services
12 October 2023, AWS Blog

Apache APISIX Without etcd?
27 July 2023, hackernoon.com

RBI reiterates need for underlying forex exposure for rupee derivatives transactions | Stock Market News
5 April 2024, Mint

Killing a market, softly: How an RBI communique could end India's thriving ETCD market
7 April 2024, The Economic Times

ETCD directives don't go well with RBI's stellar reputation
14 April 2024, Business Standard

provided by Google News

SiteWhere: An open platform for connected devices
11 July 2017, Open Source For You

Ten Popular IoT Platforms You Should be Aware of
27 March 2023, Open Source For You

11 Best Open source IoT Platforms To Develop Smart Projects
9 March 2023, H2S Media

provided by Google News

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

provided by Google News

Share this page