DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. GBase vs. OpenQM vs. OrientDB

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. GBase vs. OpenQM vs. OrientDB

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.

QpenQM is a high-performance, self-tuning, multi-value DBMS

Multi-model DBMS (Document, Graph, Key/Value)

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Multivalue DBMS

Document store
Graph DBMS
Key-value store

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

Score	1.05
Rank	#186	Overall
	#86	Relational DBMS

Score	0.34
Rank	#284	Overall
	#10	Multivalue DBMS

Score	3.25
Rank	#89	Overall
	#16	Document stores
	#6	Graph DBMS
	#13	Key-value stores

Website

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

www.gbase.cn

www.rocketsoftware.com/products/rocket-multivalue-application-development-platform/rocket-open-qm

orientdb.org

Technical documentation

www.orientdb.com/docs/last/index.html

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

General Data Technology Co., Ltd.

Rocket Software, originally Martin Phillips

OrientDB LTD; CallidusCloud; SAP

Initial release

2016

2004

1993

2010

Current release

1703

GBase 8a, GBase 8s, GBase 8c

3.4-12

3.2.29, March 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

GPLv2, extended commercial license available

Open Source

Apache version 2

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

AIX
FreeBSD
Linux
macOS
Raspberry Pi
Solaris
Windows

All OS with a Java JDK (>= JDK 6)

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

yes

with some exceptions

schema-free

Schema can be enforced for whole record ("schema-full") or for some fields only ("schema-hybrid")

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, no joins

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

ADO.NET
C API
JDBC
ODBC

Tinkerpop technology stack with Blueprints, Gremlin, Pipes
Java API
RESTful HTTP/JSON API

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

.Net
Basic
C
Java
Objective C
PHP
Python

.Net
C
C#
C++
Clojure
Java
JavaScript
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scala

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

yes

Java, Javascript

Triggers

yes

Hooks

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

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

yes

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

could be achieved with distributed queries

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

relationship in graphs

Transaction concepts

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

Atomic execution of specific operations

ACID

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

yes

Access rights can be defined down to the item level

Access rights for users and roles; record level security configurable

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

DB-Engines blog posts

Graph DBMS increased their popularity by 500% within the last 2 years
3 March 2015, Paul Andlinger

Graph DBMSs are gaining in popularity faster than any other database category
21 January 2014, Matthias Gelbmann

show all

Recent citations in the news

Infographic: What makes a Mobile Operator's setup future proof?
10 February 2024, Atos

provided by Google News

OrientDB: A Flexible and Scalable Multi-Model NoSQL DBMS
21 January 2022, Open Source For You

Comparing Graph Databases II. Part 2: ArangoDB, OrientDB, and… | by Sam Bell
20 September 2019, Towards Data Science

The 12 Best Graph Databases to Consider for 2024
22 October 2023, Solutions Review

ArangoDB raises $10 million for NoSQL database management
14 March 2019, VentureBeat

HNS IoT Botnet Evolves, Goes Cross-Platform
10 July 2018, Dark Reading

provided by Google News

Share this page