DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Graph Engine vs. Heroic vs. LevelDB vs. OrigoDB

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Graph Engine vs. Heroic vs. LevelDB vs. OrigoDB

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

A distributed in-memory data processing engine, underpinned by a strongly-typed RAM store and a general distributed computation engine

Time Series DBMS built at Spotify based on Cassandra or Google Cloud Bigtable, and ElasticSearch

Embeddable fast key-value storage library that provides an ordered mapping from string keys to string values

A fully ACID in-memory object graph database

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Graph DBMS
Key-value store

Time Series DBMS

Key-value store

Document store
Object oriented DBMS

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

Score	0.61
Rank	#240	Overall
	#21	Graph DBMS
	#35	Key-value stores

Score	0.51
Rank	#255	Overall
	#21	Time Series DBMS

Score	2.35
Rank	#111	Overall
	#19	Key-value stores

Score	0.00
Rank	#383	Overall
	#53	Document stores
	#20	Object oriented DBMS

Website

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

www.graphengine.io

github.com/spotify/heroic

github.com/google/leveldb

origodb.com

Technical documentation

www.graphengine.io/docs/manual

spotify.github.io/heroic

github.com/google/leveldb/blob/main/doc/index.md

origodb.com/docs

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

Microsoft

Spotify

Google

Robert Friberg et al

Initial release

2016

2010

2014

2011

2009

under the name LiveDB

Current release

1703

1.23, February 2021

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

MIT License

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

BSD

Open Source

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

.NET and C

Java

C++

Server operating systems

Linux

.NET

Illumos
Linux
OS X
Windows

Linux
Windows

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

yes

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

optional

yes

User defined using .NET types and collections

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

can be achieved using .NET

Secondary indexes

yes

via Elasticsearch

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

RESTful HTTP API

HQL (Heroic Query Language, a JSON-based language)
HTTP API

.NET Client API
HTTP API
LINQ

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

C#
C++
F#
Visual Basic

C++
Go
Java

3rd party binding
JavaScript (Node.js)

3rd party binding
Python

3rd party binding

.Net

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Triggers

yes

Domain Events

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

horizontal partitioning

Sharding

none

horizontal partitioning

client side managed; servers are not synchronized

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

none

Source-replica replication

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

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

depending on model

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

optional: either by committing a write-ahead log (WAL) to the local persistent storage or by dumping the memory to a persistent storage

yes

with automatic compression on writes

yes

Write ahead log

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 authorization

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

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

provided by Google News

Trinity
2 June 2023, Microsoft

Open source Microsoft Graph Engine takes on Neo4j
13 February 2017, InfoWorld

Aerospike Is Now a Graph Database, Too
21 June 2023, Datanami

IBM releases Graph, a service that can outperform SQL databases
27 July 2016, GeekWire

The graph analytics landscape 2019 - DataScienceCentral.com
27 February 2019, Data Science Central

provided by Google News

Pliops unveils XDP-Rocks for RocksDB – Blocks and Files
19 October 2022, Blocks & Files

Microsoft Teams stores auth tokens as cleartext in Windows, Linux, Macs
14 September 2022, BleepingComputer

XanMod, Liquorix Kernels Offer Some Advantages On AMD Ryzen 5 Notebook
26 July 2021, Phoronix

Threat Thursday: BlackGuard Infostealer Rises from Russian Underground Markets
21 April 2022, BlackBerry Blog

Rust-Based Info Stealers Abuse GitHub Codespaces
19 May 2023, Trend Micro

provided by Google News

Share this page