DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Firebolt vs. Postgres-XL vs. Prometheus vs. SQLite

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Firebolt vs. Postgres-XL vs. Prometheus vs. SQLite

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

Highly scalable cloud data warehouse and analytics product

Forked from Clickhouse

Based on PostgreSQL enhanced with MPP and write-scale-out cluster features

Open-source Time Series DBMS and monitoring system

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Time Series DBMS

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	1.73
Rank	#140	Overall
	#63	Relational DBMS

Score	0.53
Rank	#254	Overall
	#117	Relational DBMS

Score	7.69
Rank	#50	Overall
	#3	Time Series DBMS

Score	111.41
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Website

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

Technical documentation

docs.firebolt.io

www.postgres-xl.org/documentation

prometheus.io/docs

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

Firebolt Analytics Inc.

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Initial release

2016

2020

2014

since 2012, originally named StormDB

2015

2000

Current release

1703

10 R1, October 2018

3.46.0 (23 May 2024), May 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Mozilla public license

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

Public Domain

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

hosted

Linux
macOS

Linux
Windows

server-less

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

yes

dynamic column types

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

optional

yes

Numeric data only

yes

not rigid because of 'dynamic typing' concept.

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

XML type, but no XML query functionality

Import of XML data possible

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

distributed, parallel query execution

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

.Net
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET
JDBC
native C library
ODBC
streaming API for large objects

RESTful HTTP/JSON API

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

Go
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

.Net
C
C++
Delphi
Erlang
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Perl
PHP
Python
Tcl

.Net
C++
Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python
Ruby

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

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

horizontal partitioning

Sharding

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

depending on storage layer

yes

by Federation

none

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

Immediate Consistency

none

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

Atomic execution of specific operations

ACID

MVCC

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

via file-system locks

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

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.