DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. GBase vs. JanusGraph vs. RavenDB

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. GBase vs. JanusGraph vs. RavenDB

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

Widely used RDBMS in China, including analytical, transactional, distributed transactional, and cloud-native data warehousing.

A Graph DBMS optimized for distributed clusters

It was forked from the latest code base of Titan in January 2017

Open Source Operational and Transactional Enterprise NoSQL Document Database

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Graph DBMS

Document store

Secondary database models

Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS
Time Series DBMS

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

Score	1.05
Rank	#186	Overall
	#86	Relational DBMS

Score	2.02
Rank	#125	Overall
	#12	Graph DBMS

Score	2.84
Rank	#101	Overall
	#18	Document stores

Website

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

www.gbase.cn

janusgraph.org

ravendb.net

Technical documentation

docs.janusgraph.org

ravendb.net/docs

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

General Data Technology Co., Ltd.

Linux Foundation; originally developed as Titan by Aurelius

Hibernating Rhinos

Initial release

2016

2004

2017

2010

Current release

1703

GBase 8a, GBase 8s, GBase 8c

0.6.3, February 2023

5.4, July 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

AGPL version 3, commercial license available

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, Python

Java

Server operating systems

Linux

Linux
OS X
Unix
Windows

Linux
macOS
Raspberry Pi
Windows

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

yes

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

Standard with numerous extensions

SQL-like query language (RQL)

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

ADO.NET
C API
JDBC
ODBC

Java API
TinkerPop Blueprints
TinkerPop Frames
TinkerPop Gremlin
TinkerPop Rexster

.NET Client API
F# Client API
Go Client API
Java Client API
NodeJS Client API
PHP Client API
Python Client API
RESTful HTTP API

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

Clojure
Java
Python

.Net
C#
F#
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
Ruby

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

yes

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

horizontal partitioning (by range, list and hash) and vertical partitioning

yes

depending on the used storage backend (e.g. Cassandra, HBase, BerkeleyDB)

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Multi-source replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

via Faunus, a graph analytics engine

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

Default ACID transactions on the local node (eventually consistent across the cluster). Atomic operations with cluster-wide ACID transactions. Eventual consistency for indexes and full-text search indexes.

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Relationships in graphs

Transaction concepts

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

Atomic execution of specific operations

ACID

ACID, Cluster-wide transaction available

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

Supports various storage backends: Cassandra, HBase, Berkeley DB, Akiban, Hazelcast

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

yes

User authentification and security via Rexster Graph Server

Authorization levels configured per client per database

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

Database Deep Dives: JanusGraph
8 August 2019, IBM

JanusGraph Picks Up Where TitanDB Left Off
13 January 2017, Datanami

From graph db to graph embedding. In 7 simple steps. | by Andy Greatorex
30 July 2020, Towards Data Science

Nordstrom Builds Flexible Backend Ops with Kubernetes, Spark and JanusGraph
3 October 2019, The New Stack

Compose for JanusGraph arrives on Bluemix
15 September 2017, IBM

provided by Google News

RavenDB Launches Version 6.0 Lightning Fast Queries, Data Integrations, Corax Indexing Engine, and Sharding
3 October 2023, PR Newswire

Install the NoSQL RavenDB Data System
14 May 2021, The New Stack

RavenDB Adds Graph Queries
15 May 2019, Datanami

Review: NoSQL database RavenDB
20 March 2019, TechGenix

How I Created a RavenDB Python Client
23 September 2016, Visual Studio Magazine

provided by Google News

Share this page