DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. GigaSpaces vs. Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB vs. Netezza vs. Postgres-XL

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. GigaSpaces vs. Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB vs. Netezza vs. Postgres-XL

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

High performance in-memory data grid platform, powering three products: Smart Cache, Smart ODS (Operational Data Store), Smart Augmented Transactions

Globally distributed, horizontally scalable, multi-model database service

Data warehouse and analytics appliance part of IBM PureSystems

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

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Document store
Object oriented DBMS

Values are user defined objects

Document store
Graph DBMS
Key-value store
Wide column store

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Graph DBMS
Search engine

Spatial DBMS

Document store
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	0.97
Rank	#192	Overall
	#32	Document stores
	#6	Object oriented DBMS

Score	29.04
Rank	#27	Overall
	#4	Document stores
	#2	Graph DBMS
	#3	Key-value stores
	#3	Wide column stores

Score	9.06
Rank	#46	Overall
	#29	Relational DBMS

Score	0.49
Rank	#256	Overall
	#117	Relational DBMS

Website

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

www.gigaspaces.com

azure.microsoft.com/services/cosmos-db

www.ibm.com/products/netezza

www.postgres-xl.org

Technical documentation

docs.gigaspaces.com/latest/landing.html

learn.microsoft.com/azure/cosmos-db

www.postgres-xl.org/documentation

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

Gigaspaces Technologies

Microsoft

IBM

Initial release

2016

2000

2014

2000

2014

since 2012, originally named StormDB

Current release

1703

15.5, September 2020

10 R1, October 2018

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache Version 2; Commercial licenses available

commercial

Open Source

Mozilla public 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

Java, C++, .Net

Server operating systems

Linux

Linux
macOS
Solaris
Windows

hosted

Linux

included in appliance

Linux
macOS

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

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 can be used for describing objects metadata

yes

XML type, but no XML query functionality

Secondary indexes

yes

All properties auto-indexed by default

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-99 for query and DML statements

SQL-like query language

yes

distributed, parallel query execution

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

GigaSpaces LRMI
Hibernate
JCache
JDBC
JPA
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API
Spring Data

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

JDBC
ODBC
OLE DB

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

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

.Net
C++
Java
Python
Scala

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

C
C++
Fortran
Java
Lua
Perl
Python
R

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

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

JavaScript

yes

user defined functions

Triggers

yes

yes, event driven architecture

JavaScript

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

Sharding

horizontal partitioning

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Multi-source replication

synchronous or asynchronous
Source-replica replication

synchronous or asynchronous

yes

Implicit feature of the cloud service

Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Map-Reduce pattern can be built with XAP task executors

with Hadoop integration

Integration with Hadoop/HDInsight on Azure*

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration

Immediate Consistency

Consistency level configurable: ALL, QUORUM, ANY

Bounded Staleness
Consistent Prefix
Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Consistency level configurable on request level
Session Consistency

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

Atomic execution of specific operations

ACID

Multi-item ACID transactions with snapshot isolation within a partition

ACID

MVCC

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

Role-based access control

Access rights can be defined down to the item level

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

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.