DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Google BigQuery vs. RocksDB

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Google BigQuery vs. RocksDB

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

Large scale data warehouse service with append-only tables

Embeddable persistent key-value store optimized for fast storage (flash and RAM)

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Key-value store

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

Score	61.90
Rank	#19	Overall
	#13	Relational DBMS

Score	4.00
Rank	#84	Overall
	#11	Key-value stores

Website

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

cloud.google.com/bigquery

rocksdb.org

Technical documentation

cloud.google.com/bigquery/docs

github.com/facebook/rocksdb/wiki

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

Google

Facebook, Inc.

Initial release

2016

2010

2013

Current release

1703

8.11.4, April 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

BSD

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

C++

Server operating systems

Linux

hosted

Linux

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

yes

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

RESTful HTTP/JSON API

C++ API
Java API

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

.Net
Java
JavaScript
Objective-C
PHP
Python
Ruby

C
C++
Go
Java
Perl
Python
Ruby

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in JavaScript

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

none

horizontal partitioning

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

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

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

Transaction concepts

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

Atomic execution of specific operations

Since BigQuery is designed for querying data

yes

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

Access privileges (owner, writer, reader) on dataset, table or view level

Google Cloud Identity & Access Management (IAM)

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.